Saturday, August 14, 2010

Have you ever heard the term INTRA-preneur?

Have you ever heard the term INTRA-preneur?
It's a play on the word entrepreneur that basically means "being an entrepreneur within a big company". In other words, it's someone with a regular job who has a boss just like everyone else - except they have the “way of thinking” of an entrepreneur.

But what does that mean exactly?

An intra-preneur could be someone who leads a new project within the company, like the launch of a new product. This would have similarities to a launching a new company based around a single product because they'd still have to handle a team, look at a new market, and generally wear may hats.
An intra-preneur could also mean an engineer who thinks about the business in a broader intelligence. Most engineers are 100% focused on the technical work that consumes their time, but if an engineer was also involved in, say....bringing in new customers for the company, and making sales....he or she would be thinking like an entrepreneur.

Having an intra-prenurial state of mind within a company is grand, and I'm sure it would help you in your job. But there is one major problem with being an intra-preneur: YOU DON'T REAP THE FINANCIAL REWARDS LIKE A REAL ENTREPRENEUR!
Lets say that through networking you brought in a large new client for the firm. Let's say that through analysis outside your normal job you optimized part of the manufacturing process and saved the company 2% on every sale. Let's say you helped create a new division of the company that went from 0 to 25% market share in one year!

After all that, you would get a pat on the back and probably even get a big endorsement or bonus. But you would never be compensated for the full 100% of the value you added to the business. You could save the company $1 Million....and if you were lucky they'd give you a $10,000 bonus. It just doesn't add up.
The motive is simple: the business (and those who own it) get the profit. Not you.
A friend of mind (we'll call him JR) has a great entrepreneurial mindset, but before he fully embraced it he used up some time working at a fortune 500 company as a frustrated intra-preneur.

Monday, April 19, 2010

Self-actualization needs

Esteem needs: The needs for status, achievement, self-respect, self-esteem, independence, reputation, recognition, uniqueness, appreciation, respect, and esteem from other people (Maslow, 1954).

Physiological needs: The very basic needs such as air, water, food, clothing, rest, shelter, sex, etc. (Maslow, 1954)

Safety needs: The needs for protection from elements, guarantee, security, order, law, limits, stability, against anger and threat, etc. (Maslow, 1954)

Self-actualization needs: The needs for freedom to innovate-create, opportunity for maximum growth and development, self-fulfillment, realizing personal potential, etc. (Maslow, 1954)

Social needs: The desire to seek belonging, companionship, association, teamwork objectives, and social acceptability (Maslow, 1954).

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Direct selling in Malaysia

Organisational Behaviour Associated With Emotional Contagion Among Direct Selling Members

Junaidah Hashim

Department of Business Administration,

Kulliyyah of Economics & Management Sciences,

International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Saodah Wok

Department of Communication,

Kulliyyah of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Human Sciences,

International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and

Ruziah Ghazali

Nordant Management Sdn. Bhd., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Direct Marketing: An International

Journal

Vol. 2 No. 3, 2008

pp. 144-158

Direct selling in Malaysia

Worldwide sales turnover in the direct-selling market was estimated at more than USD80 billion in 2000, with the Asia-Pacific region contributing some 52 per cent. Statistics from the Trade Ministry of Malaysia have shown that Malaysia is one of the 14 countries in the world that has a turnover of one billion USD annually from the multi-level marketing (MLM) industry. The value of the direct selling industry in Malaysia was USD1.02 billion in 2002 with more than one million sales people and about 700 licensed direct-selling companies. The prospects for this industry are promising, with annual growth of 10-15 per cent. The most popular mode of direct selling business is multi-level marketing. Products marketed under direct-selling organisations include food supplements, healthcare products, cosmetics, kitchen ware, clothes, and undergarments. About 75 per cent of sales were contributed by Dart Far East Private Limited, Amway and Avon. Avon Cosmetics (Malaysia) Private Limited was established 26 years ago. Today, it is the leading cosmetics company in Malaysia with a network of 220,000 Avon dealers and 169 Avon beauty boutiques nationwide (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn6207/is_20000426/ai_n24903260).

The distinguishing characteristic of direct selling in terms of marketing is that the direct seller or retailer initiates contact with the potential customer instead of waiting for the customer to come and make purchase at a store or some permanent place of business. The direct seller or direct retailer therefore is a person who sells consumer products and renders services by direct personal contact with the consumer – usually, but not always at the consumer’s home. While some direct sellers or retailers may be employees of a direct sales company, and are authorised to act for the company in business matters, most direct sellers or retailers are independent business operators or are self-employed; and they enjoy the advantage of deciding when and how much time will be devoted to selling the company’s products.

In the direct selling business, it is a common practice to acknowledge distributors’ outstanding sale performance. A grand occasion celebrating and awarding top achievers with various incentive rewards, including cash or cheque, travel packages and merchandise is typically held to celebrate top achievements. The top achievers are usually given the opportunity to share their happiness and joyous feeling through delivering inspirational and motivating talks with the purpose of inspiring and motivating others to be successful also. It is noteworthy that the winning feeling of the top achievers appears to be contagious on other members and it is able to influence them to work hard and emerge as top achievers as well.

Saturday, April 17, 2010

AMWAY TRAINING

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Direct-selling is a marketing approach in which the sales of consumer products or services are directly provided to consumers, generally in their homes or the homes of others, away from fixed retail locations (Direct Selling Association US, 2003). Direct-selling originated in the United States. Nutrilite, founded by Lee S. Mytinger and William S. Casselberry in 1945, first used the marketing method of direct-selling in the United States. Today, the direct-selling approach is a global industry and is becoming even more so. Direct-selling companies give direct sellers the opportunity to enjoy a flexible part-time job that fits around their family time or a part-time job that supplements their other income. The direct-selling industry is large and growing (Barrett, 2003).

Direct-selling organizations in the United States grew in sales volume from US$15 billion in 1993 to US$28.7 billion in 2002, according to the trade association representing US direct-selling organizations. The number of salespeople participating in direct-selling in the United States grew from 5.7 million in 1993 to 13 million in 2002 (Direct Selling Association US, 2003). Similarly, sales volume by direct-selling organizations in Taiwan grew from US$6.5 million in 1992 to US$1.3 billion in 2002. The number of salespeople participating in direct-selling in Taiwan grew from 95,000 in 1992 to 3.2 million in 2002 (World Federation of Direct Selling Associations, 2003).

Most new recruits are introduced into direct-selling organizations by an experienced direct seller who has recruited them. These new recruits are selected with no requirements concerning their qualifications and backgrounds, such as educational level, social status, or other differences. Therefore, direct-selling companies have to provide substantia] training for their new recruits. Direct sellers should be given adequate education and training to enable them to conduct their sales activities. Both new and established direct sellers must have the backing of their direct-selling companies to provide training and advice whenever the sellers need it. Since most new recruits have no idea how to run a business, direct-selling companies have to assume the responsibility to educate them (Yager, 1993).

Traditional direct-selling organizations invest considerable time and effort on continuing education programs and sales meetings for the purpose of their direct sellers’ training. These direct sellers are expected to invite new people to business opportunity meetings, to visit homes at mutually convenient times, to explain and demonstrate the use of products, and to be available to their network members and consumers for any clarifications or complaints that may subsequently arise (Jones, 2002). Direct-selling organizations spend a great deal on resources to enhance their direct sellers’ ability to increase their sales and enlarge the sales and marketing networks, but the outcome of the education and training activities and retention of direct sellers are still less than what is expected by the companies (Roy, 2003).

The direct-selling industry experiences a high rate of turnover, which brings about a waste of organizational resources (Brodie, 1995). Those individuals already involved in direct-selling are responsible for the recruiting and training of new direct sellers. Then, the direct-selling company becomes involved in training activities by holding large rallies, sales meeting, training seminars, and the like, for the purpose of follow-up training. Those types of training meetings are held in a continual process throughout the year. The direct-selling company has to assume the responsibility of running such activities related to developing direct sellers (Pearce, 1998).
The Amway Corporation, founded in the United States by Richard DeVos and Jay Van Andel in 1959, operates in approximately 80 other countries and territories around the world, with over 3.6 million independent direct sellers, called “distributors” in the Amway Corporation, participating in Amway’s direct-selling business (Amway Corporation, 2003). Amway Taiwan, established in 1982 with only 10 employees, currently has more than 200 staff members with more than 200,000 active distributors. Today, Amway Taiwan is the biggest company in the direct-selling industry in Taiwan (Amway Taiwan, 2003).

In Amway Taiwan, distributors arid new people are invited to attend a business opportunity meeting held in one senior distributor’s house or go to the training centers to take training programs every week. The purpose of the business opportunity meeting is let distributors bring new people to a home meeting space where they can see the sales and marketing plan shown by a higher-level distributor. In the business opportunity meeting, any distributor can give lectures and demonstrate the sales and marketing plan to the audience. Those people who go to the training center can obtain more advanced knowledge of Amway’s products, sales, and marketing technique to enlarge the new distributors’ client base and marketing network (Amway Taiwan, 2003).

The greatest and most important asset of a business is its people. The workforce is changing, and those changes will affect motivation and work. In a competitive and increasingly global market, the direct-selling industry may need to consider such issues as providing effective education and training to their salespeople, motivating them to participate in such learning activities, and making sure the learning activities are what they need. Then, salespeople will be equipped with adequate competency and be willing to take risks for their companies (Ivancevich, 2001).
The Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1954), one theory of motivation, states that human beings are motivated by unsatisfied needs, and that certain lower needs must be satisfied before higher needs can be addressed. In ascending order, these needs are identified as physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization (Austin, 2002). This study attempted to explore the motivation for participation in continuing education and training programs in Amway Taiwan using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.


Statement of the Problem
The purpose of the study was to use Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to examine motivational factors influencing Amway Taiwan distributors’ decisions to participate in continuing education programs and to identify future training needs. Specifically, the study examined the extent to which Maslow’s motivational factors determine distributors’ decisions to participate in continuing education. Also, based on the demographics, the study examined the differences that existed among distributors’ perceptions toward the motivational factors. Finally, the study investigated relationships between motivational factors and the distributors’ perceived career success.

Research Questions
In accordance with the purpose of the study, and based on the statement of the problem, the following questions guided the course of this study:
1. To what extent are Amway Taiwan distributors motivated by physiological needs to participate in continuing education programs?

2. To what extent are Amway Taiwan distributors motivated by safety needs to participate in continuing education programs?

3. To what extent are Amway Taiwan distributors motivated by social needs to participate in continuing education programs?

4. To what extent are Amway Taiwan distributors motivated by esteem needs to participate in continuing education programs?

5. To what extent are Amway Taiwan distributors motivated by self-actualization needs to participate in continuing education programs?

6. What differences exist in the perceived motivation of the five levels of needs among Amway Taiwan distributors based upon the following demographic variables:
a. Gender,
b. Age,
c. Marital status,
d. Educational status, and
e. Years of experience in the direct-selling industry?

7. What are the relationships that exist between the perceived influences of motivational factors of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and their contributions to career success for the distributors in Amway Taiwan?

8. To what extent do the perceived influences of motivational factors of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and their contributions predict career success for the distributors in Amway Taiwan?

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Public sector entrepreneurship

1.1 Background
Since the I 970s. the public sector has been continuously pushed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its performance. Government has responded to a turbulent external environment with decreasing tax bases, rapidly changing technology, diversification of the public’s demands, and heightened accountability. Entrepreneurship can be an important component that leads to generating alternative revenue, improving operational performance, and developing innovative ways to meet socioeconomic demands. The virtues of traditional ideas about government, however, have been challenged as significant changes in economic, societal, demographic, and cultural movements have emerged. The desire to be more competitive in a dynamic environment, for instance, demands changes in the role of government. Public sector inefficiencies driven by stability. regulation, and equality arc no longer tolerated. Many public services already have been confronted with considerable competition from the private sector (Peters, 1996). Within traditional models of administration, government may have a difficult time managing the emerging issues effectively.

The administrative reform movement has been remarkable in the number of reform initiatives and the fundamental nature of changes being addressed. The public sector has created and adopted innovative ways for structuring and managing government arrangements as a consequence of administrative reform activities. Many administrative reforms and efforts under the umbrella term “reinvention” have been introduced and implemented to improve government performance. One approach, the new public management, advocates the public sector’s shift toward the efficiency-dominated nature of the public interest. That statement that government services have to be delivered by the public entity, indeed, has been questioned following tight budgets and greater competition. With the goal of performing government tasks effectively, a number of market-based approaches have been introduced into the public sector: privatization, public-private partnerships, outsourcing. and public entrepreneurship. Each approach has pros and cons that vary with time and place. Depending on the unique circumstances, the effects of each technique may have different results. In recent years, the models of outsourcing, public-private partnership. and privatization have been well researched. Entrepreneurial attempts in the public sector, however, are less clearly addressed than other approaches.

The emerging form of entrepreneurial government is introduced as a means to market-oriented practices for better services (Drucker, 1985; Osborne & Gaebler, 1992). The entrepreneurial model refers to a major tool for innovation and productivity in both public and private sectors. The adoption of the private entrepreneurial rationale into the public sector is critical to satisfying the public’s needs for higher efficient, more responsive, and lower cost government (Cohen & Eimicke, 2000). Entrepreneurial government provides better opportunities for public administrators to innovatively deliver public services. In fact, the practices of privatization reduce public sector involvement and responsibility as a significant service provider (Morris & Jones, 1999). As a result, adopting entrepreneurship practices into the public sector through improving in-house capacities may be “the one best way” to resolve recurrent perceptions of “failing government” services (Liewellyn & Jones. 2003).

Some scholars argue that emphasis on entrepreneurship challenges many of the core values of the public sector (Cohen & Eimicke, 2000) and democratic theory (Terry, 1998), because characteristics of entrepreneurial management are somewhat opposite those of the public sector (deLeon, 1996). Entrepreneurial exercises may conflict with public service values such as equity, accountability (Roberts & King, 1996). and responsiveness. Government functions are of a more nebulous nature than those of the private sector, because the values of public organizations are multiple, inconsistent and often contradictory (Rainey, 1983). Implementing innovative approaches to entrepreneurship in the public sector is not easy given existing government management practices and organizational structures. However, the propensity toward increasing efficiency and effectiveness allows the public sector to adopt entrepreneurial exercises. The search for efficiency within the public sector does not prevent promoting other worthy public goals. Adopting entrepreneurial thinking may allow the public sector to become less ossified. As the application of entrepreneurial ideas to the public sector gains acceptance, the focus can shift to questions about their implementation in a specific context. An attempt to establish an appropriate balance between entrepreneurial management and public organizational structures is needed.
The effects of entrepreneurial activities tend to be underestimated by traditional government thinking. Entrepreneurial practice in the public sector lags behind that in the private sector due to the traditional assumptions of public organizations. The public sector lacks built-on mechanisms for encouraging entrepreneurial arrangements within its own structures. The concept of public entrepreneurship requires different emphases and boundaries from those in the private sector. Without a tightly coupled configuration of entrepreneurship in the public sector, the fabric of public entrepreneurial attempts unravels.

1.2 Statement of Purpose
Despite the enthusiasm and widespread belief in the applicability of entrepreneurial practices to the public sector, there are still ongoing debates and doubts about their suitability to public organizations. However, government reforms and efforts toward market-oriented organizations have made it possible to stimulate entrepreneurial practices in public sector arrangements. Indeed, searching for innovative opportunities, providing better services, and adding new values as a consequence of implementing entrepreneurial approaches to public entities arc not contradictory to long-established views of public management. Since public management is a multi-dimensional concept (Valker & l3oync, 2006). adding an entrepreneurial framework will provide important insights on government’s reform strategies.

Existing research on public sector entrepreneurship has focused on a normative approach utilizing examples of prevailing individual entrepreneurs. Public entrepreneurship does not just rely upon individual’s traits and characteristics. While prior research is dedicated to the study of micro-level explanations for entrepreneurial behavior, a fuller assessment requires an understanding of the macro conditions that would foster or hinder entrepreneurship. Forster, Graham & Wanna (1996) conceived that individual qualities and motivations arc far less important than the institutional and collective commitment to public entrepreneurialism. Organizations themselves perform entrepreneurial activities (Miller & Friesen, 1982; Cornwall & Perlman, 1990; Jelinek & Litterer, 1995) and organizational characteristics facilitate a propensity toward entrepreneurship (Slevin & Covin. 1990). Focusing on psychological and behavioral characteristics of individuals is insufficient to understand the very heart of public entrepreneurship as a systematic mechanism for improving government performance. Gartner & Carland (1988) suggested that the study of the personal characteristics of entrepreneurship hold little expectation for furthering the field. Rather, an organizational perspective on entrepreneurship will provide a “big picture” to drive government improvement. Organizational arrangements restrict individuals’ opportunities and alternatives and increase the probability of certain types of behavior (DiMaggio. 1988).

On the other hand, some research has presumed that the single most effective way to attain public sector entrepreneurship is to be more businesslike in structure and function. Public sector entrepreneurship has multidimensional attributes. The term public entrepreneurship is more than simply being enterprising or businesslike (Sadler, 2000). Osborne & Gaebler (1992) even conclude that government cannot be run like a business because of fundamental differences between the public and private sectors. Public entrepreneurship is not financially driven (Boyett, 1996); therefore principles of private entrepreneurship cannot be strictly applied to the public sector. Researchers have addressed the application of entrepreneurial behaviors and activities that need to be adjusted before being applied to public sector settings (Cornwall & Perlman. 1990; Boyett, 1996). The study of public entrepreneurship requires a different research scope based on structural and managerial contexts from private sector entrepreneurship. The practices of public sector entrepreneurship are not simply an echo of those of the private sector.

Little research has been conducted to develop a theoretically consistent, empirically robust model of public entrepreneurship to predict the effects of public entrepreneurial practices. Public sector entrepreneurship research is still emerging. where growth as a research area is rapid but institutional arrangements in the public sector are not definitely established yet. Instead of analyzing a significant set of empirical phenomena, the promise of public entrepreneurship has become too rhetorical and fragmented due to the lack of evidence. The language of public entrepreneurship is blurred and over-used without conceptual agreement or a generally accepted model. The lack of an appropriate framework for public entrepreneurship from the field of public administration has undermined its contributions to the improvement of government functions. Moreover, the misleading expectations on the effects of public entrepreneurship at the organizational level may generate a less considerable commitment of entrepreneurship in the public sector.

The field of public entrepreneurship needs to define the extent and nature of its research and prove the effect of entrepreneurial functions in the public sector through coupling a variety of intellectual connections. In addition, the accumulation of empirical knowledge is needed to understand this field. This study focuses on organizational contexts to defining the nature of public sector entrepreneurship and determinant factors as to public entrepreneurship. The primary purpose of this study is to determine what factors influence the adoption of entrepreneurial behaviors and activities in the public sector. The second purpose is to examine the relationships between these determinant factors and three dimensions of public entrepreneurship, as well as the relationships between three-dimensional public entrepreneurship and organizational performance. The third purpose is to analyze the effects of determinant factors and three sub-dimensions of public entrepreneurship on organizational performance. The research addresses the following questions: What are the relationships between determinant factors and the three dimensions of public entrepreneurship, as well as the relationships between the three dimensions and organizational performance? To what extent do such determinants and the three dimensions of public entrepreneurship influence organizational performance at the state level?

1.3 Significance of the Research
While theoretical debates on public entrepreneurship have received significant attention, no generally accepted model of public entrepreneurship has verified, and empirical evidence has been lacking as well. The literature on entrepreneurship in the public sector usually links private sector models to public entrepreneurial practices based on individual attributes. However, the public sector differs from the private sector in its objectives, obligations, accountability, and responsibility to stakeholders. Simply copying entrepreneurial practices from private sector may lead to a fundamental misunderstanding of the roles of government (Mintzberg. 1996).

Adopting and implementing entrepreneurial arrangements in the public sector requires performance of equivalent public sector traditional tasks. Public sector entrepreneurial activities and opportunities are difficult to measure empirically because they are poorly defined. Without a solid theoretical framework and systematic analysis about public entrepreneurship, the magnitude of its applicability and its functions may be undermined in the public sector. This study will ultimately enhance its own field of public entrepreneurship which focuses on improving state government performance. The public entrepreneurship framework presented here will contribute to conducting more in- depth and systematic analysis in the organizational setting.

1.4 Outline of the Research
Chapter One provides the overall introduction to this study by presenting the background of entrepreneurship research, the purpose of this research, and the significance of this study.

Chapter Two reviews the extensive literature on entrepreneurship by providing theoretical background, main research trends, and the theory of entrepreneurship. The importance of entrepreneurial activities is traced back to three main streams of orientations — economic, human behavior, and organizational. The next section explores the definitions and multidimensional construct of entrepreneurship, especially three dimensions of entrepreneurship — risk taking, innovation, and pro-activity.

Chapter Three focuses on concepts, definitions, and dimensions of public entrepreneurship. This research frames three dimensions of public entrepreneurship at the organizational level tends to vary independently of the others.

Chapter Four proposes theoretical and empirical frameworks of public entrepreneurship and hypothesizes the relationships between determinant factors and three dimensions of public entrepreneurship, as well as the effects of determinants on organizational performance. The model of public entrepreneurship will provide a comprehensive empirical insight of public entrepreneurial activities at the state level.
Chapter Five discusses a detailed research design and methodology, including sampling. operationalization. research design and questionnaire validation, data collection, and data analysis procedures. A two-stage procedure pretest is conducted to correct weaknesses of questionnaire and validate survey questions.
Chapter Six conducts an empirical analysis to test proposed hypotheses and research questions. This research utilizes three statistical techniques: exploratory factor analysis utilizing the principal component technique with varimax rotation, multiple regression analysis, and multiple group path analysis. Before conducting primary empirical analysis, descriptive data analysis and reliability test are performed to test data applicability.

Chapter Seven discusses major results, their implications, the limitations of this research, and the directions of future research in the field of public entrepreneurship. Based on the findings, the research suggests theoretical implications for the field of public entrepreneurship, and policy and practical implications for state government agencies. Furthermore, this study proposes several future research issues in measurement and a boundary of public entrepreneurial research.

Friday, April 9, 2010

Significance of the Study

The intent of this study was to provide a pragmatic as well as a theoretical contribution to the field of direct-selling companies' continuing education and training. The findings will assist direct-selling company's education programs for training managers by providing insights into the types and levels of motivation for participants to attend continuing education activities.

To date, Maslow's theory has been used rarely in empirical studies to focus on participants' motivation for continuing education programs, especially in the direct-selling industry. In interpreting behavioral intentions to participate in continuing education and training programs in direct-selling companies, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs could be adapted by management to provide insight into motivational factors for attendance. The perceptions of distributors involving education and training can be used for making recommendations or decisions regarding the allocation of various resources. Findings may also provide management with advisory references that can enhance both their education and training programs and their marketing efforts.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of uniformity and clarity, the following terms are defined in relation to their use in the study.

Continuing education: Continuing education consists of educational activities which serve to maintain, develop, or obtain the knowledge, skills, and professional performance and relationships that a professional uses to provide services for customers, the public, or the profession (The American Association for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003).

Direct seller: "A person who is a member of a distribution system of a direct-selling company. A direct seller may be an independent commercial agent, independent contractor, independent dealer or distributor, employed or self-employed representative, franchisee or the like" (International Chamber of Commerce, 2003, Definition section,

Delimitation

The study may be limited by the following conditions:

1. The population was exclusively those distributors who sign sales contracts with the Amway Corporation in Taiwan and are active in the direct-selling market.

2. The results are applicable only to the Amway Corporation in Taiwan. Generalizations are not extended to the educational and training environments of other direct-selling companies or Amway in other locations.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails