Category: Management

The term Levels of Management differentiates different managerial positions in an organization. When the organization grows in size and when the employees also increase in number, it leads to increase in the number of levels of the organization and vice versa. There are three levels of management basically :

1. Top Management – The General Manager, Managing Director, Chief Executive, Board of Directors all belong to this category. Authority mainly lies with this level of management. The top level management generally performs planning and co- ordination function. It lays down the broad policies and goals of the organization. It is also answerable to the shareholders for functioning of the organization. The middle level managers are also appointed by the top level management. It also maintains links with society at large.

2. Middle level Management – The departmental heads and the branch heads belong to this category of management. The Middle level management is answerable to the top level management for functioning of their departments. The middle level management generally performs organizing and directing functions. It implements the organizational goals and plans according to the directions of the top management. They act as mediator between top and lower level management by clarifying and explaining policies from top to lower level. Also the middle level has to communicate significant data and reports from lower level to the top level management. It also boosts the lower level managers for better performance. It even has to train the low level managers.

3. Lower level Management – The foremen, supervisors ,superintendents ,etc. all belong to this category of management. They generally have to personally oversee and direct the lower level employees. This level of management generally performs directing and controlling functions. They train and boost up the workers. They look after the problems and grievances of the workers and try to solve them.

Inventory management system consists of a series of processes with reference to the tracking, handling and managing of goods and materials that are held in stock. Inventory management is also very important in a business venture that helps in controlling assets that are being produced for sale during the normal operations. The main goal of inventory management is to control costs of operation and supply chain either directly or indirectly along with accountability.

Automated dispensing machines help in controlling inventory costs and reduce production downtime by minimizing stock outages through automatic electronic reordering of each item. These highly efficient and automated inventory management systems can be used for a variety of tools and supplies. Companies can gain more from lower operational and maintenance costs with the use of this advanced vending equipment and technology that streamlines and automates the reordering process.

Features provided by some of the inventory management systems are:

1. Access control and user limits to ensure that the right items are used as specified and in the right quantities; even non-compliant usage can be identified and managed.

2. Real-time information to check usage patterns, inventories and restocking requirements.

3. Alerts signal when stock is low, orders are late or when usage patterns change.

4. Suppliers can be automatically notified of restocking requirements.

5. Easy-to-use reports are available to track usage patterns, inventory levels, costs and restocking requirements.

6. Data can be easily exported to various applications for custom analyses.

With the following features available in some of the inventory management systems, now it’s easier to get a competitive edge in your business.

The three lines of defence principle is a long and well established concept that has been deployed in a variety of industries and situations.
In the insurance industry the three lines have consisted of the following:
The business the day-day running of the operation and the front-office
Risk and compliance the continual monitoring of the business
Audit the periodic checking of risk and compliance.

In part this approach is the solid foundation upon which firms can protect themselves against a range of potential risks, both internal and external, and to a degree it is an approach that is forced upon them through regulators insistence on external audits as well as on an embedded risk management capability.

As reliable and well proven as the three lines of defence concept is throughout the insurance industry, it is in need of an update. In todays market there is a far greater number of risks and regulations and an ever-increasing level of complexity in business. Simply being sure that every major risk is in hand is a difficult task.

It is not so much the concept of the three lines of defence that needs to be overhauled but the way that these three lines communicate with each other and the relationship between them.

The complexity of todays market affects the risk and compliance function more than any other. In the majority of organisations management of the various different forms of risk operational risk, compliance risk, legal risk, IT risk are all carried out by different teams, creating a pattern of risk silos. This situation leads to a number of negative consequences. The first of these concerns efficiency.

These risk silos each gather their information by asking the business to provide various information relating to their daily tasks and any potential risks associated with them. Because of the silo structure, the business will find itself being asked for this same information on a multiple of occasions. This not only leads to inefficiency due to the duplication of effort, it can also lead to frustration from front office staff and subsequent disinclination to engage with risk management.

Such is this level of frustration that, according to one insurer which recently appointed a new chief executive, when the new head asked his staff what single change would make their life easier he was told to do something about the endless questionnaires and check sheets that they have to fill out to satisfy risk managers and compliance officers.

While frustration among staff is never a positive development, any companys risk management programme depends on getting buy-in from the staff so anything that threatens the success of this programme has to be addressed.

Perhaps more importantly there is also an inconsistency due to the different ways this same information will be interpreted by different risk teams. This disparate relationship between risk teams can also lead to a lack of recognition over potential correlations between various risks. For example, the recent sub-prime crisis that has affected so many banks may have been avoided if there had been more co-ordination and communication between the credit department and those selling mortgages to people with bad credit.
Similarly the 6.4 billion loss at Socit Gnrale was the result of several risk oversights, combining a lack of controls on individual traders as well as a failure to implement various checks on the trading systems themselves. There was also a negligence of market risk factors with risk management not highlighting a number of transactions having no clear purpose or economic value.

Major risk events rarely result from one risk and most commonly involve a number of potential exposures all combining. Consequently insurers need to be more joined up in their risk management and more consistent in the way that risk is reported across the organisation.

For those individuals charged with the responsibility for enterprise-wide risk management, their task is made harder by the inconsistent formats that they receive their risk information. For example, interest rate risk may be reported as a single Value at Risk number, whereas regulatory compliance or operational risk may be expressed through a traffic light format. How is a chief risk officer, or indeed a CEO, expected to rank such disparately expressed exposures?

What organisations are now looking to do is to gather all of the various risk information in a consistent format for their chief risk officers to work from. So having a common framework for this process is crucial.
There are various initiatives in the insurance industry ICAS, Solvency II and, often, the Basel Accord all of which have contributed to the growth of risk and compliance teams. The chief requirement for all of these regulations is capital adequacy, meaning that insurers have to set aside a calculated reserve of capital to cover a number of potential risk scenarios.

However, regulators will say that they are not simply looking for firms to fulfil their most basic regulatory requirement and to set aside a defined sum of money to cover a list of risk scenarios. Instead they are looking for firms to concentrate on the methodology used to arrive at these numbers, and on ensuring that the risk management process is thoroughly embedded throughout the organisation and scenario analyses bring together risk information from all of the various risk silos.

Scenario analysis is one approach that firms are using to meet their regulatory requirements but effective scenario analysis is very much based on the ability to collate and correlate risk information from all over the organisation.

For the internal audit teams, their primary concern is to be more effective and to ensure that they are not simply repeating the work of the risk and compliance teams and are adding value by rigorously testing this work. Such a task requires access to this information and, ideally, to be using the same common framework as the risk and compliance teams so that information can be seen in the correct context.

We are seeing much greater independence and objectivity in the internal audit role, says Simon Rogerson, head of internal audit at Zurich Financial. In an increasing number of organisations the internal audit function is no longer confined to existing within a corner the finance department and has more direct communication with senior management.

The Role of Technology:
According to Rogerson, the use of technology to facilitate the evolution of the three lines of defence is a new development in the insurance industry. Because it has been hard to clarify the different lines of defence and their relationships, it has been difficult to build a business case for a new system and to build the necessary workflow around these different roles.
The situation is exacerbated by the presence of separate legacy systems in the business, risk and audit departments. Everyone is aware of the weaknesses in their own systems but this knowledge does not always translate across the three lines of defence. This leaves most insurers with two choices. The first is to go back to the start and design a new all-encompassing system from scratch. The second choice is a system that supports common processes and reporting while allowing each function to continue using specialist solutions that suit their own needs.

I think the successful firms will be those that recognise there are different functionalities in these different spaces but they are all able to communicate with each other in a common language and through common systems, says Rogerson. Observations can be shared and specific risk issues can then be discussed through an email exchange and summary reports can be automatically sent out to managers.

For internal auditors a lot of their work is manually-based, says Rogerson. But technology would enable us to do these things quicker and more accurately. The system would also enable us to make certain risk issues generic so that where a risk is identified in one office or department we can then alert all the relevant risk managers in other departments and offices to see if this risk has been recognised and if there are processes in place to manage this risk. By automating this identification of risk, it enables insurers to take a smarter, more efficient and more global approach to the internal audit function.

For risk managers it is about simplifying the process. They have a limited set of resources and want to make as much use of them as possible. In order to achieve this, it often means involving the business in carrying out much of the risk process controlled risk assessments through recording any losses or the breaches where these losses occur. By conscripting the services of their business colleagues, risk managers are able to concentrate on the value-added side of their work and their role.

There are also some wider benefits to the organisation from such a system and the principle behind it. The more that front-office staff is exposed to the mechanics of the risk management process, rather than being repeatedly petitioned for the same information from multiple parties, the more they are aware of its importance and their role in it.

Decades ago, total quality management was a fashionable concept in many organisations. The frailty of this concept was that in having a dedicated management team in this area, the rest of the business could assume that quality was no longer their problem but someone elses. This same misconception could be applied to risk and compliance, unless the business is kept well-informed of the risk management process and their own role within this process. Therefore it is important to make everyone realise that risk is their problem too.

When conducting various aspects of a business, a business owner should look into various lms solutions. These solutions are also known as learning management solutions. The great things about these systems, is that they have grown in sophistication over the last decade, and are a great way to keep employees of the same company, on the same page at all times.

Typical use for lms solutions comes down to constantly training employees through modules, and keeping employees up to date with the policies, and culture of the particular company. For instance, if there is a new service to be offered at a company, lms learning management are great ways to test the skills of an employee, and ensure that they are reading the necessary materials, needed in order to boost their job performance, and ensure that they still care about the job in which they are participating.

Such modules can be something as simple, as the new guidelines for customer service. If a company decides to implement a new rule of contacting a customer within thirty seconds of coming into the store, the employee needs to know this. Through various modules, the employee can be told the benefit of this new policy, and how to exactly implement this new policy that will increase the employees’ performance, the customer experience, as well as the benefits of the company as a whole.

The great thing about learning solutions, such as these, is that it can be implemented company wide, and is a great way to ensure that employees are on the same page, as to what is expected of them as well as their job performance. Further, there can be rewards given to employees who best implement the new rules and guidelines that the company is trying to enforce. For instance, those who contact more customers, more frequently, and more successfully, may get a financial prize, or something else that gives them the incentive to surpass their previous efforts.

This healthy form of competition is great in developing a business culture that shows the care for both the customers, as well as the employees of any given company which can be easily achieved with the help of lms learning management solutions This incentives performing at someone’s peak, and can be a great way to keep the job that the employees are performing, fun and more interactive. This also builds a longer lasting bond between employee and employer, throughout the increased performance of the employee. This in term will create a culture of longer lasting jobs for both the employee, as well as the employer. The employee gets to have fun, making money that they need and deserve. The employer then has to do less hiring, therefore spending less money and effort to bring in new employees.

The writer is having a good knowledge about competency models. Hope this article has been able to provide you the kind of information that you were looking for.

Major pharmaceutical companies rely on intensive drug development exercise in order to face competition and grow. Drug development is costly consumes time and unpredictable. The matter becomes worse for a company whence patent runs out and generic competition begins. Being R&D intensive the revenue flow out is substantial. There is increasing pressure on drug companies to reduce cost and come up with new drugs in order to compete in the markets.

The industry is facing challenges in product discovery, development and subsequent manufacture. This is where efficient project management provided by outsourced firms comes into the picture.

Phenomenal amount of investment is required for drug development and promotion. Subsequently the number of new products entering the market is decreasing rapidly. Hence strategic planning has become imperative for pharma majors. This calls for a new manner in which projects are managed. But it is important to optimize process with regulatory framework. The safety requirements have to be paid heed as well.

Most of the drug development activity is being outsourced to countries like India. Expertise in project management from pharmaceutical consultant is the need of the hour. They are better able to handle specific issues. There expertise leads them to a proactive approach.

Outsourcing drug development contract research through project managers benefits the companies. They take advantage of the strength of the organizations. Proper and careful project management is a prerequisite if advantage is to be gained through collaborations.

In project management the weight age is on marking out the co relation between various process for starting, planning and successful completion of the projects. On many instances projects fail due to the inefficiency of the project managers.

The newly developed products are highly expensive and their consumptions is limited to developed countries. Never the less developing economies like India and China will provide larger scope for marketing these drugs.

With technology transfers and contract research being outsourced to third World countries and small players there should be more producers of new drugs. The paradigm shift is required in order for the industry to survive and produce new drugs for the service of the people.