대학원 레포트

슬슬 모아뒀던 자료나 썼던 글들 옮기면서 원래 쓰던 국내 블로그에서 여기로 옮겨오려고 하는데.. 워낙 거기를 오래 쓰기도 했고 쌓인 흔적들을 어디까지 살리고 어느 것들은 버리고 할지 여전히 고민된다.

대학원 때는 그냥 읽어야하는 자료가 영어니까, 바빠 죽겠어서 다시 우리나라 말로 바꿔 생각할 여유가 없으니까 숙제를 막 영어로 써서 내고 했는데 (그러다가 가끔 빠진 a가 붙어서 돌아오기도 했지만) 지금 보니까 이거 뭔 정신으로 두서없이 막 썼는지 모르겠다. -_-;; 그나저나 이건 후프스 영어 연수 받기 전에 썼던 건지 그 후에 썼던 것인지도 기억이 안 나네. 

아, 영어로 써낸 숙제의 한결같은 특징은, 요약 부분은 길고 내 생각 쓰는 부분은 아주 짧다는 거다. 남의 글 요약 노가다,  남의 것 까대기....이런 거야 말로 대학원 생활의 결정체이자 대학원생의 일 아니겠어...;;

• Title: E-Business: Revolution, Evolution, or Hype?
• Author: Cotman,T., Devinney,T., Latukefu, A., and D. Midgley
• From: California Managiment Review, Fall 2001, 44(1), pp.57-86

• Summary: 

A number of people in various areas see Internet as revolutionary catalysts. Revolution can be defined by the breath and depth of the changes. The Internet itself may indeed represent a revolutionary in communication. However still unresolved issue to us is whether it represents a revolutionary in the conduct of business. It is important to answer this issue because if the change is revolutionary then managers should ‘rethink’ their firm strategies. On the other hand, if the change is simply evolutionary, it will apply to some firms than to others, and pre-Internet strategies will be appropriate in many circumstances.
To know whether we are amid evolution or natural technological revolution, these authors ask two questions: where is e-business concentrated; and why is e-business is occurring as it is?

There is difference between espoused theories and theories-in-use. In that manner, the prediction Internet would impact all forms business didn’t come to pass. The potential for real transformative change and exploitation of e-business lies in B2B activities in sharp contrast to the higher profile but less pervasive downstream B2C activities. 

When they examine the business rules (‘Brands will die’, ‘Price will fall’, ‘Middleman will die’, ‘Scale is irrelevant’, ‘Being first is key’, and ‘Winner take all’) driving the e-business economy by reflecting on the past, authors find most of them are conjecture and change is speculative. That is, they suggest that fundamental rules of business remain relevant today as ever. 

Finally, authors evaluate the pervasiveness and process orientation e-business, because those two characterize industrial revolution. Though the Internet and e-business have dramatic effect, the productivity dividends that accrue through use of technology have not been pervasive. And also from a process orientation standpoint, which is about the changes that can be brought about within an organization’s culture, the Internet and e-business are not enough to warrant the revolution. The fact is that they don’t have distinction affecting firm strategy and decision-making yet.

---

Much of what authors are witnessing in e-business is natural competition. That is an evolutionary process within existing structures and familiar territory for most managers. However, it doesn’t mean managers may relieve all the time. There are also indications they should take note of ceaselessly like value chain matter that shows significant cost cut even post-bubble, so they should put in place sensemaking approaches that question its appropriateness to their firm and its circumstances. 

This paper emphasize that if networked environment are affecting us seriously, it is not yet enough to change the way we think in business activities - that is, technology changes but economic laws do not. Anyway, I wonder. If the Internet has influence on the way to communicate, is it probable that changes of the way to think being followed, and then business rules too?