Library Ict Essay Example for Free

Library Ict Essay Introduction Rapid developments in information and communication technologies (ICT) and their wide application in all aspects of life have led to dramatic changes. These changes are so revolutionary that is not realistic to expect stability in their wake 1 . Information technology (IT) entered into libraries, especially academic and research libraries, during the 1960s. Libraries employed IT to speed up their daily activities and reduce their operating costs. Many repetitive activities were upgraded using IT 2 . IT allows integration of library activities and increases efficiency and enables users to have remote access to information and around the clock access. New technologies provide unlimited information from different sources and facilitate reformatting data from different sources 3. Definition Ebijuwa and ToAnyakoha (2005) 4-5 define ICT as tools and as well as means used for collection, capture, process, storage, transmission and dissemination of information†. The American Library Association (1983) 5 defines IT as the application of computers and other technologies to the acquisition, organization,storage, retrieval and dissemination of information. The computers are used to process and store data, while telecommunications technology provides information communication tools, which make it possible for users to access databases and link them other computer networks at different locations. IT and ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) are used somewhat interchangeably. Objectives of the Study The major objectives of this study are 1. To identify the ICT infrastructure facilities available in the university libraries. 2. To identify the ICT based software implemented in the university libraries. 3. To find out the various types of electronic resources available in the university libraries. Methodology The study is based on the primary data collected from the government university libraries and deemed university libraries given in table 1. Table 1. List of University Libraries S. No Name of the University 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Anna University,Chennai University of Madras, Chennai The Tamil Nadu. Dr. Ambedkar Law University,Chennai Tamil Nadu Dr. M. G. R Medical University,Chennai M. G. R . Educational and Research Institute, Chennai SRM University,Kattankulathur Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences,Chennai B. S. Abdur Rahman University,Chennai Bharath University,Chennai Sri Ramachandra University,Chennai Deemed universities Type of university Government Universities 8. 9. 10. A structured questionnaire was designed to obtain data. The questionnaire was divided into four sections: Hardware, Software, Technologies, and Electronic Resources. Sixteen questionnaires were distributed among university librarians, of which 10 university librarians were responded (62.5%). Review of Literature Walmiki and Ramakrishnegowda (2009) 7 studied ICT infrastructures in university libraries of Karnataka and found that most of the libraries were uâ€Å"lack sufficient hardware, software facilities and do not have adequate internet nodes and bandwidth†. The campus LANs were not fully extended to exploit the benefits of digital information environment. Ahmad and Fatima (2009) 8 found that researchers use a variety of ICT products and services for research and further remarked that ICT products help â€Å"to find  information, access information, manage, integrate, evaluate, create, and communicate information more easily†. It was recommended that training be organized to increase the use of ICT-based products and services. Adeleke and Olorunsola (2010) 9 studied ICT and library operations found that ICT facilities were the major constraints facing libraries in the use of tools. Shafi-Ullah and Roberts (2010) 10 found that ICT infrastructure is necessary to make provide a research culture in higher education institutions and recommended allocating funds for ICT infrastructure. Etebu (2010) 11 studied ICT availability and found a situation that is not encouraging. Patil (2010) 12 found that users were not trained to use ICT- based products and services and further recommended an ICT training programme to increase the use of ICT products and services. Data Analysis The study was carried out in ten university libraries. The demographic information related to these respondents is shown in table 2. Table 2. Demographic Information about Respondents S. No Description 1. 2. Total Percentage 40% 60% 100% Government University 4 Deemed University Total 6 10. Five ICT infrastructures such as computers, printers, laptops, scanners and photocopiers were identified for this study and same is shown in table 3. Table 3. ICT infrastructure vs. University Libraries S. No Description ICT Infrastructure 110 1. Computers 1 4 11-20 21- 31 30 above 2 3 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 1. 5 5 2. 1 2 3. 2 1 Total WAM Rank (10) (40) 2. Printers 9 1 (20) (30) 0 0 (90) (10) 3. Laptops 9 0 (0) (0) 0 1 (90) (0) (0) (10) 4. Scanners 9 1 0 0 10 (100) 10 (100) 2. 1 2 (90) (10) 5. Photocopiers 9 1 (0) (0) 0 0 2. 1 2 (90) (10) (0) (0) It can be seen from table 3 that 4 (40% ,WAM 3. 2, rank 1) libraries were between 11 and 20 computers, followed by printers, scanners, and photocopiers ranging between 1 and 10. ICT infrastructure mentioned in table 3 were further distributed library-wise, shown in table 4. Table 4. ICT Infrastructure vs. University Libraries S. N Description Government University Libraries n=4 Total Deemed University Libraries n=6 110 11- 21- 31 20 30 above 1 0 2 (50) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4 N 1A 10 (0) 0 1120 3 (50) 0 (0) 0 2130 2 31 above 1 6 Total N A 1. Computers (0) 1 (0) (25) (25) (0) 2. Printers 0 3 1 0 (100) (0) (0) 4 0 6 (33. 33) (16.67) (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (100) 6 (100) 6 (100) 6 (100) (0) (75) (25) (0) 3. Laptops 3 1 0 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (100) (0) (60) 4 0 5 (75) (25) (0) 4. Scanners 0 4 0 (100) (0) (83. 33) (0) 4 0 5 1 (0) (100) (0) 5. Photocopiers 0 3 1 (100) (0) (83. 33) (16. 67) (00 4 0 6 0 (0) 0 (0) (0) (75) (25) (0) (100) (0) (100) It can be seen from table 4 that 2 (50%) government university libraries had more than 31 computers and 3 (50%) deemed university libraries had from 11 to 20 computers. All libraries 4 (100%) from government universities and 5 of those from deemed university libraries had scanners. Three government university libraries and 6 deemed university libraries had between 1 and 10 photocopiers. Four important software applications library automation, digital library, e-learning, and digitization were identified and further ascertained using an Objective Scaling System. The results are shown in table 5. Table 5. ICT based Software in University Libraries S. No Description ICT based Software Total WAM Rank Yes No 1 (10) 9 (90) 9 (90) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 1. 0 4 1. 1 3 1. 9 1 1. 9 1 1. Library Automation Software 9 (90) 2. Digital Library Software 1 (10) 3. E-learning Software. 1 (10) 4. Digitization Software 0 (0) (Yes=Available, No=Not Available) Ninety percent of the libraries have implemented library automation and digital library software. Most of the libraries have yet to implement e-learning software and digitization software. The software were further distributed library-wise and are shown in table 6. Table 6. ICT based Software vs. University Libraries S. No Description ICT based Software Government Universities Libraries Deemed Universities Libraries Yes 1. Library Automation Software 3 (75) 2. Digital Library Software 0 (0) 3. Digitization Software 0 (0) 4. E-learning Software 1 (25) No 1 (25) 4 (100) 0 (0) 3 (75) Total 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) Yes 6 (100) 1 No 0 (0) 5 Total 10 (100) 10 (16. 67) (83. 33) (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (100) 6 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) (Yes=Available, No=Not Available) Three-quarters of government university libraries and 6 (100%) deemed university libraries have implemented library automation , while one (25%) government university and one (16. 67%) deemed university had implemented both e-learning and digital library software. Technologies such as barcode, smart card, RFID, videoconferencing, and Internet technonologies were identified and are shown in table 7. Table 7. ICT based Technologies vs. University Libraries S. No Description ICT based Technologies Total WAM Rank Yes 1. Barcode Technology 2. Smart card Technology 9 (90) 3 (30) 3. RFID Technology 3 (30) 4. Video Conference Technology 0 (0) 5. Internet Technology 10 (100) No 1 (10) 7 (70) 7 (70) 10 (100) 0 (0) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 2. 00 1 1. 00 5 1. 3 3 1. 3 3 1. 9 2 (Yes=Available, No=Not Available) All the libraries surveyed provide internet facilities, while 90% have implemented barcode technology. Three libraries have implemented smart card and RFID technologies. None of the libraries has implementing videoconferencing. The technologies mentioned in table 7 were distributed library-wise and are shown in table 8. Table 8. ICT-based Technologies Universities Libraries S. No Description ICT based Technologies in University Libraries Government Universities Deemed Universities Yes 1. Barcode Technology 3 (75) No 1 (25) Total 4 (100) Yes 6 (100) No 0 (0) Total 10 (100) 2. Smart card Technology 2 (50) 2 (50) 2 (50) 0 (0) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 1 5 10 (16. 67) (83. 33) (100) 1 5 10 3. RFID Technology 2 (50) (16. 67) (83.33) (100) 6 (100) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 4. Internet Technology 4 (100) 0 (0) 5. Video Conference Technology (Yes=Available, No=Not Available) All libraries in government and deemed universities provide Internet facilities. Seventy-five percent of government university libraries and 100% of deemed university libraries have implemented barcode technology. Nine electronic resources were identified for this study and are shown in table 9. Table 9. Electronic Resources vs. University Libraries S. No Description E-Resources in University Libraries Yes 1. E-Books 6 (60) 2 E-Journals 9 (90) 3. Full text Databases 5 (50) 4. Bibliographic databases 4 (40) 5. CD-ROM databases 8 (80) 6. E-Learning Resources 7 (70) 7. ETD 4 No 4 (40) 1 (10) 1 (10) 6 (60) 2 (20) 3 (30) 6 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 10 1. 4 7 1. 7 4 1. 8 2 1. 4 8 1. 1 9 1. 9 1 1. 6 6 Total WAM Rank (40) 8. DVD 7 (70) 9. Library Consortium 8 (80) (60) 3 (30) 2 (20) (100) 10 (100) 10 (100) 1. 8 2 1. 7 4 (Yes=Available, No=Not Available) Nearly all the libraries subscribe to electronic journals, and an almost equal number belong to a library consortium. Electronic resources mentioned in table 10 were further distributed library-wise and are shown in table 10. Table 10. Electronic Resources vs. University Libraries S. No Description Electronic Resources in University Libraries Government Universities Deemed Universities Yes 1. E-Books 2 (50) 2. E-Journals 4 (100) 3. Fulltextdatabases 1 (25) 4. Bibliographic databases 2 (50) 5. CD-ROM databases 3 (75) 6. E-Learning Resources 3 (75) 7. ETD 1 (25) 8. DVD 2 No 2 (50) 0 (0) 3 (75) 2 (50) 1 (25) 1 (25) 3 (75) 2 Total 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 (100) 4 Yes 4 No 2 Total 6. (66. 67) (33. 33) (100) 5 1 6 (83. 33) (16. 67) (100) 3 (50) 2 3 (50) 4 6 (100) 6 (33. 33) (66. 67 (1) 5 1 6 (83. 33) (16. 67) (100) 4 2 6 (66. 67) (33. 33) (100) 3 (50) 5 3 (50) 1 6 (100) 6 (50) 9. Library Consortium 4 (100) (50) 0 (0) (100) 4 (100) (83. 33) (16. 67) (100) 4 2 6 (66. 67) (33. 33) (100) (Yes=Available, No=Not Available) All the libraries from government universities and a large number from deemed universities subscribe to e-journals. large number have acquired other electronic resources and belong to library consortia. Conclusion and Recommendations. The application of ICTs are increasing in academic libraries, especially in the university environment. Users’ expectations have increased due to developments in technologies. The study recommends the following The University Libraries must increase the numbers of computer available to enable the users to maximize the usage of ICT-based resources and services. The Digital Library Service† is one of the most useful services in the university library. Users can access digital resources using a number of different open source digital library software packages. The libraries should implement digital library software. It is found that no library was implemented digitization software. It is very useful to digitize rare collections such as older and out of print editions. References 1. Webster, F. (2001). A new politics. In Webster, F. (Ed. ), Culture and politics in the Information Age. London: Routledge. 2. Igwe, P. O. (1986). The electronic age libraries: Present and future prospects. International Library Review, 34(1):43-52. 3. Haglund, L. , Olsson. (2008). The impact oo university libraries of changes in information behavior among academic researchers: A multiple case study. The Journal of Academic librarianship, 34 (1):51-69. 4. Ebijuwa, A. A. (2005). Information and Communication Technology in university libraries: The Nigeria experience. Journal of Library and Information Science, 7(12) :23-30. 5. ToAnyakoha, M. W. (2005). Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in library services. Coal City Libraries, 2(12) :. 2-12. 6. American Library Association (1983). The ALA glossary of library and information science. Chicago. ALA. 7. Walmiki, R. H. , Ramakrishnegowda (2009). ICT infrastructures in university libraries in Karnataka. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 56:236-241. 8. Ahmad, N. , Fatima, N. (2009). Usage of ICT products and services for research in social sciences at Aligarh Muslim University. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 29(2):. 25-30. 9. Adeleke, A. A. , Olorunsola, R. (2010). ICT and Library operations: More on the online cataloguing and classification tools and techniques in Nigerian libraries. The Electronic Library, 28(3):453-462. 10. Is ICT infrastructure capable to accommodate standardized library management systems? : Case studies of library automation from public sector universities in Islamabad (Pakistan). Available: http://www. crl. du. ac. in/ical09/papers/index_files/ical-44_191_402_1_RV. pdf 11. Etebu, A. T. (2010). ICT Availability in Niger Delta University Libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice. Available: http://unllib. unl. edu/LPP/etebu3. htm 12. Patil, S. G. (n. d. ). Usage of ICT Products and Services for research at MET’s institute of engineering, Bhujbal Knowledge City (met-bkc-ioe): A case study. Available: http://knol. google. com/k/usage-of-ict-products-and-services-forresearch#

Critical Complexity :: Writing Personal Narrative Papers

Critical Complexity When I heard Mr. Sabol announce the topic for W131’s latest assignment, an exploratory essay, I was furious. Of a world of scintillating and fascinating topics, he picked â€Å"writing† as the subject of the class’s papers. Writing, of course, was not my favorite theme; I felt the topic had been so overused over the course of the semester that writing any more about it would be futile and destructive to any shred of creativity the class had left. Furthermore, I had expected to be allowed to explore the topics that interested me the most outside of class[d1] . Regardless of my expectations, I had been stuck with an assignment I didn’t want to do. I kept asking myself why on earth I should write about writing[d2] . For that matter, I didn’t understand what purpose it would serve. At first I just viewed the topic as a way to give W131 students more homework. Perhaps it was a way of cruel fate driving me over the edge of sanity. Maybe it was just a matter of giving Mr. Sabol what he wanted to hear from our exploratory papers, not a matter of free thinking and the true exploration of our external and internal worlds. However, a notion began nagging at the back of my mind – there had to be a better answer than the ones I had come up with before. They were answers to the problem that were born of frustration and impatience, not of careful thought and consideration. I decided then that, as simple and perhaps insignificant as my personal problems with the topic were, I needed to address them in some way. Addressing my problems with the assignment would make me take time to think critically about my dilemma and find the answers that could help me become more motivated with the topic[d3] . I felt it was the only way I could even begin my exploratory essay without pulling all my hair out. Of course I didn’t have the answer to my initial question yet – What’s the purpose behind writing about writing? As I could not find the answer in a textbook or get a straight answer about it from Mr. Critical Complexity :: Writing Personal Narrative Papers Critical Complexity When I heard Mr. Sabol announce the topic for W131’s latest assignment, an exploratory essay, I was furious. Of a world of scintillating and fascinating topics, he picked â€Å"writing† as the subject of the class’s papers. Writing, of course, was not my favorite theme; I felt the topic had been so overused over the course of the semester that writing any more about it would be futile and destructive to any shred of creativity the class had left. Furthermore, I had expected to be allowed to explore the topics that interested me the most outside of class[d1] . Regardless of my expectations, I had been stuck with an assignment I didn’t want to do. I kept asking myself why on earth I should write about writing[d2] . For that matter, I didn’t understand what purpose it would serve. At first I just viewed the topic as a way to give W131 students more homework. Perhaps it was a way of cruel fate driving me over the edge of sanity. Maybe it was just a matter of giving Mr. Sabol what he wanted to hear from our exploratory papers, not a matter of free thinking and the true exploration of our external and internal worlds. However, a notion began nagging at the back of my mind – there had to be a better answer than the ones I had come up with before. They were answers to the problem that were born of frustration and impatience, not of careful thought and consideration. I decided then that, as simple and perhaps insignificant as my personal problems with the topic were, I needed to address them in some way. Addressing my problems with the assignment would make me take time to think critically about my dilemma and find the answers that could help me become more motivated with the topic[d3] . I felt it was the only way I could even begin my exploratory essay without pulling all my hair out. Of course I didn’t have the answer to my initial question yet – What’s the purpose behind writing about writing? As I could not find the answer in a textbook or get a straight answer about it from Mr.

Operation Strategy

OPERATIONS STRATEGY Strategy: The Concept of Strategy The word strategy is derived from the Greek term â€Å"strategos† (plural strategoi; Greek: [ , ], literally meaning â€Å"army leader†) is used in Greek to mean â€Å"general†. However, the term is also used to describe a military governor which command, plan and conduct of a war.When strategy applied to business wars, the strategy refers to the establishment of objectives, the setting of direction, and the development and implementation of plans, with the goal (in place of military â€Å"victory†) of achieving ascendancy over one’s adversaries according to Andrews (1971), Ghemawat (2002) and Porter (1980). In order to have the desired competitive impact, a strategy has to operate over an extended time horizon and embrace a broad spectrum of activities, ranging from resource allocation processes to day-to-day operations.It must integrate decisions affecting these different sets of activities in to a coherent pattern, both over time and across groups that often compete for the same resources. An effective strategy also usually involves concentrating a company’s efforts and resources on a limited range of directions. Focusing resources on certain directions reduces available for others, nonetheless, so a coherent strategy usually required that a company make trade-offs among various â€Å"expected outcomes†.TYPE OF STRATEGY The word strategy is used in many contexts that is useful to identify and contrast three different types of management-related strategies. At the highest level, corporate strategy identifies the industries and markets in which a company will operate. Corporate strategists make decisions that implement these choices, including investment in and divestment of businesses together with allocation of resources among existing businesses.Business strategy, the second level of company strategy, is focused at the level of the individual business or b usiness unit within the company, and is concerned with where the business positions itself within a particular industry or market as well as with how and with what capabilities the business will win customers, cooperatively and in competition with other parties in its industries.In other word, the business strategy is also concerned with strategic business units (SBUs) as each SBU might have its own business strategy, which specifies (1) the scope of that business and its relation to the corporation as a whole, and (2) how it proposes to position itself within its particular industry to achieve competitive advantage in various ways according to Hayes et al (1988). To be effective, elaborated further from Porter (1980), this advantage must meet important customer needs, take into account competitors’ strengths and weaknesses, and be sustainable given the SBU’s capabilities.Empirical evidence from a study over 100 companies by Sterman (2000) found that those companies th at engaged in system level thinking about their business strategies significantly outperformed those that focused at the product level. To be more specific, Hax and Wilde 2001 differentiated three views a company might consider in developing a strategy. For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. 1. Best Product- this view emerges from the classic competitive strategy.It focuses on competing by positioning the company’s products or services as low cost, having a unique set of features, or targeting a focused or niche segment in the market. 2. Total Customer Solution- the customer is at the center and the earliest to satisfy. It argues that very good understanding of customer and developing close relationships with those customers to support them in creating their own economic value.Company competing with this view will focus on supply chains to response to provide family of products or services that closely match customer requirement. 3. System Lock-In- this view com prehends the enterprise, the customers, the suppliers, and the most important those company whose product and services enhance the strategy-making company’s own product and service portfolio. The key to success in this view is to identify, attract and nurture those companies whose products and services are complementary, engaging them in a collective effort to please the customer.In this study, companies engaged in â€Å"system lock-in† far outperformed those employing â€Å"total customer solutions† or â€Å"best product† strategies on both Market Value Added (MVA) and Market-to-Book Value (MBV) as in Exhibit 1: Exhibit 1 Relative Performance of Three Positioning Strategies Strategy Best Product Total customer solutions System lock-in Number of companies in the study Relative Market Value Added Performance Relative Market-to-Book Value Performance 74 67 16 1. 0 1. 6 4. 0 1. 0 1. 2 2. 0 Source: Hax and Wilde, The Delta Project: Discovering New Sources of Profitability in a Network Economy, Pelgrave, 2001.Thus, to develop business strategy, the company must think about its positioning not only to its competitors but also its customers, suppliers and potential complementary product or service producers. Understanding the system-level view, the company will be able to provide better solutions from integration of value chain with attention to company produce the products or services that complement its products and services or any other solutions. However, the understanding customer is more critical to strategy development and execution.Hayes and Wheelwright (1984) and Fine and Hax (1985) had proposed five dimensions to use as the framework which are Cost, Quality, Availability, Features/ innovativeness and Environmental/ performance. Cost The cost has been defined as the cost of the product or service to the customer. Cost this includes not only purchase price of the product or service, but the cost of ownership as well. The aspects of cost to customer will be vary on the industry or category of the product such as the cost customer consumer product will be only on its selling price.While industrial product, like machine and equipment, will be more likely For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. to extend its concern on installation, maintain and others cost related not only to the equipment alone. Quality The quality defined by Garvin (1988) and King (1987) is broken down into two aspects, the tangible and intangible. The tangible aspects of quality include the aesthetics of the product, or output of the service, how reliable it is over period of time, whether or not it is safe, and how convenience to fix and etc.While the intangible aspects include the competence, courtesy, and credibility of the people involved in the process, as well as the degree to which those people understand the customer’s needs and communicate well with the customers. They also include assessments of the environment s urrounding the purchase process or service, including considerations such as accessibility and security. In addition, to examine the quality, it may be important to differentiate assessments of the actual quality delivered from the quality perceived by the customer.Availability The availability dimension is increasingly important and demanding by customers. Availability requirements clearly vary by business. Grocery store customers expect products to be available on the shelf when they go shopping. An out-of-stock item is a lost of sale for a particular brand or product and also may be lost of sale for the store itself. Airlines buying airplanes, on the other end of the spectrum, do not expect to buy their products off the shelf, but they do expect delivery when promised.Plans are made months ahead, or in some cases years ahead, of projected delivery to put the new aircraft into service immediately upon delivery, possibly retiring and replacing another aircraft. Late deliveries can cause great disruption to an airline’s entire schedule. Availability applies to new product introductions as well. Some industries such as consumer electronics focus on fast time-to-market for new products. Others have longer product development and introduction cycles but must delivery new products when promised. Moreover, availability refers to the variety of the products a company offers.There is a wide range of ways in which companies offer customized products or services to their customers. Hence, availability describes the firm’s ability to deliver the variety of products or services its customers want when they want them. Features and Innovativeness The inherent characteristics of the product or service is Features such as the featured services from the first or business class fares on full service airlines like Japan Airline, Thai Airways or less featured services, such as passage on Southwest Airlines’, and Airasia’s â€Å"no frills† fligh t.Innovativeness is closely related to features due to the fact that advanced technologies are developed to be new featured of the product. For instance, global positioning systems (GPS), as innovative technology, is equipped with hi-end car and represent as additional feature. Environmental Performance It may apply to the product (or tangible output of a service) itself, or to the process by which that product was made or service delivered. Environmental management systems, for example, focus on processes and aim to reduce For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. the environmental impact (e. . hazardous waste generation) of the processes used to make the products or deliver the services. ISO 14000 and the European Eco-Management & Audit Scheme (EMAS, www. quality. co. uk/emas. htm) are but two of several frameworks for companies to follow to improve environmental performance. The third level is composed of the functional strategies that support the type of competitive a dvantage to be pursued. A typical functional strategy is the sets of decisions made in each of the functional areas of an organization that determine how it will use in the overall business strategy of the company.Research and development managers make decisions about technology use, engineering resource allocation, product development process, research and development skills and organization, product prototyping and testing approaches, and involvement of customers in product development. Marketing managers make decisions about product and service positioning, advertising and promotion, and customer relationship management. Finance and Accounting managers make decisions about sources of funds, resource allocation, and currency hedging.The decisions make in these various functions make up the overall business strategy of the organization. Synergistic decision making among the functional support of an overall business strategy and leverage cross-functional capabilities to create and s upport business strategy direction is allowing the company to be successful. Beckman and Rosenfield (2008) have integrated these strategy into framework illustrated in Exhibit X. X. Each individual functional area may develop its own capabilities that in turn serve business strategy, or the functional areas may work in concert with another to create overarching capabilities.Business strategy is best supported, when the activities undertaken by the functional areas and/or the capabilities they develop complement one another and work together to achieve the goal of business (Fine and Hax 1985). They refer to this requirement as crossfunctional integration or fit. OPERATIONS STRATEGY An operations strategy is a set of goals, policies, and self-imposed restrictions that together describe how the organization proposes to direct and develop all the resources invested in operations so as to best fulfill (and possibly redefine) its mission (Hayes et al 1998).In the case of business organiza tion, the mission usually is expressed terms of survival, profitability, and growth, and is pursued by trying to differentiate itself from its competitors in some desirable way. A company’s operation strategy, then, has to begin by specifying how it proposes to support that chosen form of competitive differentiation. By integrating resources invested in the operations function into a cohesive, purposeful whole, such a strategy can enable operations to become a powerful source of competitive advantage. For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph.D. Operations Strategy Goal As described earlier, five dimensions of customer requirements which are cost, quality, availability, feature/innovativeness, and environmental performance has been mapped with operations performance measures by Fine and Hax (1985). In each case, operations can affect some, but not all, of the company’s performance along that dimension. Cost Operations directly affects the cost of the product or service and thus its purchase price (assuming that products are priced to achieve some profit) through its direct or indirect control of the supply chain.It can also affect the product’s cost of ownership through joint efforts with engineering (research and development) and/or marketing in the design of the product or service. Quality Operations also directly controls the quality of the product or service, again through its direct or indirect control of the supply chain. This is often thought of as a â€Å"conformance to specifications† task as operations strives to have all products and services delivered meet the specification set forth by the developers on behalf of the customers.Operations can also influence the design of a product or service so that it can be produced or delivered with higher quality. It does so, again, in joint efforts with research and development and marketing. Availability Operations is primarily responsible for the availability of products or services already in the market and often determines make-to-order versus make-to-stock strategies. Operations’ flexibility and process knowledge are critical in determining both the variety of features and the availability an organization can offer.The ability of operations to control the supply chain and the timeliness with which products or services can be delivered directly affects availability. The determination of how much flexibility operations can offer is a joint decision with marketing and research and development. Features/Innovativeness Generally, features are the purview of the marketing and research and development organizations, although the operations function is influential in determining the range of products, services, or features the firm will be able to provide based on its won ability to deliver them.Process knowledge and innovation are key to the organization’s ability to customize output to specific customer needs, to embed new innovations, and to allow research and development to create novel products and services. For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. Exhibit 2: Business and Operations Strategy Performance Dimensions Dimension Cost Customer Concerns Purchase price Cost of ownership Operations Influence Costs of: Materials Production Delivery Distribution Capital Productivity Inventory turnover Design for cost Cost Objectives are measured using labor, materials, and capacity productivity; inventory turnover; unit cost.Quality of: Materials Production Delivery Distribution Design for quality Quality measures include percent defective or rejected, frequency of failure in the field, cost of quality, and mean time between failures. Availability Timeliness of delivery of product or service Ability to respond to volume fluctuations Timeliness of new product introductions Delivery performance is measured by percentage of on-time shipments, average delay, expediting response time. Flexibility is measured by product mix range, volume, and lead time for new products.Process capability Capabilities for more featured and innovative products and services Process knowledge and ability to extend it Design and development capabilities Measures of process capability assess the types of products or services that can be delivered. Environmental performance Managing environmental performance of suppliers or other partners in the supply chain Managing the environmental performance of internal production or service delivery operations Environmental performance measures include both emissions measures (water, air, and solid waste) as well as measures of product reuse and recyclability.Quality Tangible characteristics Aesthetics Reliability, durability, and safety Serviceability Intangible characteristics Competence, courtesy, understanding, and communication Access and security For purchase: Off-the-shell or make-toorder Of new products: Rapid cycle or planned evolution Variety of range of products availabl e: Degree of customization Availability Features/ innovativeness Inherent characteristics of a product or service Degree of innovation Environmental performanceDegree to which process that produces and delivers the product or service is environmentally sound Degree to which the product or service itself is environmentally sound and reusable or recyclable For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. Source: Fine and Hax. (1985), â€Å"Manufacturing Strategy: A Methodology and an Illustration,† Interfaces 15, no. 6 (November-December) cited in Beckman, Sara L. , Rosenfield, Donald B. (2008). Operations Strategy: Competing in the 21st Century, U. S. : McGraw-Hill International Edition. Environmental Performance Finally, operations own the environmental erformance of both internal and external operations throughout the supply chain. It either works with suppliers to achieve adequate environmental performance in their facilities or works to achieve it in internal Operation s or both. Operations may also influence research and development to design products that are more environmentally sound (e. g. , easier to disassemble and recycle). Operations Goals in Practice Researchers have identified many alternative categorizations of these operations performance dimensions over the years (Dangayach and Deshmukh 2001).Some identify many categories such as the following 11: low cost, design flexibility, volume flexibility, quality conformance, product performance, speed of delivery, dependability of deliveries, after sales service, advertising, broad distributions, and broad product line (Miller and Roth 1994). Others summarize the characteristics in fewer categories defined as follows (Spring and Biadeb 1997): Cost: produce and distribute product (or service) at low cost. Quality: manufacture or deliver product or service with high quality or performance standards.Delivery dependability: meet delivery schedules. Flexibility: react to changes in product, chang es in product mix, modifications to design, fluctuations in materials, and changes in sequence. Yet others link clusters of operations performance characteristics into stylized business strategies such as those of caretaker, marketer, and innovator (miller and Roth 1994). Some researchers have examined similarities and differences in emphasis on these performance categories by industry, by geography, and over time.One study, for example, found that computer and electronics companies rate high product quality as their most important competitive factor, but computer companies rate innovative features and designs more highly than do electronics companies, while electronics companies place more emphasis on short lead times than do computer companies (Lau 2002). Others have found important differences among various countries or geographies in the emphasis they place on these characteristics. After achieving a high level of quality, for example, Japanese manufacturers turned their focus t o time-based competition and innovative products, while the U.S. and Europe continued to rank quality as a critical objective (Kenney and Florida 1993). The Manufacturing Futures Survey, which collected longitudinal data over many years, found that lasting improvements in manufacturing can only be achieved by first building quality, followed by delivery reliability, then flexibility and responsiveness, and then technological leadership. At each For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. step of the progression, cost efficiency is pursued for the given capability set, culminating with an overall focus on cost leadership (Roth et al. 989, Miller et al. 1989). Operations Decision Categories Creating an operations strategy essentially entails making a set of decisions about the structure and infrastructure of operations (Skinner 1969, Hayes and Wheelwright 1984). Structural decisions deal with the vertical integration of the operations, its facilities, capacity, and process te chnology, whereas infrastructure decisions focus on organizational and human resource policies, sourcing and supply chain management practices, quality management systems, planning and control systems, and information technology.Infrastructure is developed over time through persistent day-to-day practice, top management commitment, and cross-functional efforts to create capabilities that support and leverage the firm’s structure. Infrastructure decisions usually deal with less tangible outcomes than do structural decisions, but it is the effective integration and synthesis of structural and infrastructural decisions that create long-term operations excellence (Dangayach and Deshmukh 2001).In making decisions in each of these categories, operations managers strive to ensure that the decisions are mutually supportive and consistent with one another. Further, they aim to have the collection of decisions support or facilitate the overall business strategy. The decision categories are briefly discussed hereunder. Structural Decisions Vertical Integration. Vertical integration decisions answer questions about how much of the Value chain a firm should own. Should they own more or less of the value chain reaching back to their suppliers?Should they own more or less of the value chain reaching forward to their customers? Issues considered include cost of the business to be acquired or entered; degree of supplier reliability; the proprietary or nonproprietary nature of the product or process to be brought in house; transaction costs of contracting through market versus non-market mechanisms; and impact on risk, product quality, cost structure, and degree of focus. Process Technology. Process technology decisions relate to the firm’s investment in the technology it uses to transform materials and/or nformation into products and/or services. Evaluation of this investment requires a firm to address several questions: Should its process be more labor intensive or more automated? Should it purchase technology or develop it in house, or use some combination there of? Should it be a follower or a leader in process technology investment? How does its process technology investment fit with its product technology development strategy? Capacity Capacity decisions establish how much capacity the firm will carry in order to manage both short-term fluctuations in demand and longer-term growth opportunities.Capacity For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. may be added gradually or in large chunks. How should the firm deal with cyclical demand? Different types of capacity may be added at different times. How should the firm use capacity to influence its competitors’ decisions or actions? Facilities Facilities decisions are often closely related to capacity decisions, as firms may add or close facilities in response to a need for more or less capacity, but are often longer-term.In thinking through its facilities decisions, a firm will answer questions about how many facilities it should have, where they should be located, and what they should do. Facilities issues become even more crucial in a global environment as firms decide whether to locate facilities near the local market to increase share in that market, to access local technologies, to reduce costs, or to leverage local talent. Infrastructural Decisions Sourcing. Sourcing decisions follow closely from vertical integration decisions.Once a firm has decided not to own certain parts of its value chain, it must determine what types of relationships it should have with the entities outside the boundaries of the firm. Should the suppliers be managed with the five forces competitive-strategy framework suggested by Porter in this chapter, or with the more cooperative approach modeled by the Japanese keiretsu? Business processes, such as product and service Business Processes and Policies. generation, order fulfillment, and service and support, cut across fun ctional boundaries in an organization and are critical in serving the customer.Business process decisions include determining and defining critical processes, setting performance goals for each, and then choosing an appropriate organizational design to met those goals. Some of the organizational design questions include: How should the operations organization be structured? What are the roles of the line and staff organizations? What skills are required in operations? How should those skills be developed and retained? How should Those skills be developed and retained? How should operations personnel be rewarded? Supply Chain Coordination.While business process management focuses inside the organization, operations management today often requires management of multiple sources, markets, and flows outside the firm as well. Thus, operations managers face strategic decisions about the structure of the supply chains. Should they co-locate their own operations with those of their supplier s? How many layers should they have in their distribution networks? What modes of transportation are appropriate for which links in the supply chain? How should flows of goods among the various entities in the supply chain be monitored?Information Technology. Information technology and process technology decision are closely related, but process technology decisions relate to the physical equipment with which products and services are made and delivered, while information technology refers to the system that moves information around the operations function, between operations and the other functional areas in the firm, and among the players in the broader supply For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. chain. There are a number of decisions operations managers make about their information technology.How automated should information processing be? Should information systems be purchased or developed internally? Should the firm be a follower or a leader in the development and/or use of state-of-the-art-technology? How does the information technology investment fit with other investments the firm is making? Operations Capabilities Development. There is some evidence that traditional operations improvement programs such as lean manufacturing, just-in-time, total quality management, focused factories, and the like are misused by managers.Often hastily adopted as an industry best practice or in emulation of a competitor, these programs can yield poor results, wasted effort, and missed opportunities for an organization. When thoughtfully and fully implemented, however, they can be enormously successful. In developing operations strategy, managers must examine such programs and consider the capabilities required to develop and implement them. REFERENCES Andrews, K. (1971). The Concept of Corporate Strategy, Dow Jones-Irwin: Homewood, IL. Beckman, S. L. , D. B. Rosenfield. (2008). Operations Strategy: Competing in the 21st Century, U.S. : McGraw-Hill Intern ational Edition. Dangayach, G. S. and S. G. Deshmukh. (2001) â€Å"Manufacturing Strategy: Literature Review and Some Issues. † International Journal of Operations & Production Management 21, no. 7 (July), pp. 949-964. Fine and Hax. (1985), â€Å"Manufacturing Strategy: A Methodology and an Illustration,† Interfaces 15, no. 6 (November-December) pp. 28-46. Garvin, D. A. (1988). Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge. New York: The Free Press. Ghemawat, P. (2002). â€Å"Competition and Business Strategy in Historical Perspective. Business History Review 76 (spring): 37-74. Ghemawat, P. (1991). Commitment: The Dynamic of Strategy. New York: Free Press. Grant, R. M. (1998). Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Inc. Hax, A. C. and D. L. Wilde II. (2001). The Delta Project: Discovering New Sources of Profitability in a Network Economy, Pelgrave. Hayes, R. H. and G. P. Pisano. (1996). â€Å"M anufacturing Strategy: At the Intersection of Two Paradigm Shifts. † Production and Operations Management 5, no. 1 (Spring), pp. 25-41.Hayes, R. H. and S. C. Wheelright (1984). Restoring Our Competitive Edge: Competing through Manufacturing. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Hayes, R. H. and S. C. Wheelright and K. Clark. (1988). Dynamic Manufacturing: Creating the learning organization, New York: Free Press. Hayes, R. H. , and D. M. Upton. (1998). â€Å"Operations-Based Strategy. † California Management Review 40, no. 4 (Summer), pp. 8-25. Kenney, M. and R. Florida (1993). Beyond Mass Production: The Japanese System and its Transfer to the United States. New York: Oxford University Press. Kim, W. C. nd R. Mauborgne (2005). â€Å"Blue Ocean Strategy: From Theory to Practice. † California Management Review 47, no. 3 (Spring), pp. 105-121. King, C. A. (1987). â€Å"A Framework for a Service Quality Assurance System. † Quality Progress 20, no. 9 (September), pp. 27-32. Lau, R. S. M. (2002). â€Å"Competitive Factors and Their Relative Importance in the U. S. Electronics and Computer Industries. † International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22, no. 1, (January), pp. 125-135. For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D. Miller, J. G. , and A. V. Roth. 1994) â€Å"A Taxonomy of Manufacturing Strategy. † Management Science 40, no. 3, pp. 285-304. Mintzberg, H. (1987). â€Å"Five P’s for Strategy. † California Management Review 30, no. 1, pp. 11-24. Mintzberg, H. (1994). â€Å"The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. † Harvard Business Review (JanuaryFebruary), pp. 107-114. Mintzberg, H. , and A. McHugh. (1985). â€Å"Strategy Formation in an Adhocracy. † Administrative Science Quarterly 30, pp. 160-197. Mintzberg, H. , B. Ahlstrand, and J. Lampel. (1998). Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour through the Wilds of Strategic Management.New York: The Free Press. Ohmae, K. (1982). The Mind of Strategist: The Art of Japanese Business. New York:McGraw-Hill Book Company. Porter, M. E. (1996). â€Å"What is Strategy? † Harvard Business Review 74, no. 6 (November-December), pp. 61-78. Prahalad, C. K. , and G. Hamel. (1990). â€Å"The Core Competence of the Corporation,† Harvard Business Review 68, no. 3 (May-June), pp. 79-93. Prahalad, C. K. , and G. Hamel. (1994). Competing for the Future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Roth, A. , A. De Meyer, and A. Amano (1989). Global Manufacturing Strategies: An International Comparison,† In Managing International Manufacturing, ed. K. Ferdows. Amsterdam North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers B. V. , 1989. Skinner, W. (1974). â€Å"The Focused Factory. † Harvard Business Review 52, no. 3 (May-June), pp. 113-121. Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. New York: Irwin McGraw-Hill. Tzu, S. (2003). The Art of War. Philadelphia, PA: Running Pr ess Book. Von Clausewitz, C. (1993). On War. London: Everyman’s Library. For IBM4710 Inter OM Chayakrit Asvathitanont, Ph. D.

Environmental Taxes Act - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 5 Words: 1488 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Argumentative essay Tags: Act Essay Taxation Essay Did you like this example? Brief 213168 I have been asked to provide the Luminous Lighting Company with a legal opinion on the likely tax implications of section 10(1) of the Environmental Taxes Act 2007, which came into force in the UK on 31st January 2008, on its current business activities: The impact of section 10(1) of the Environmental Taxes Act 2007 on the Companyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s current business activities; namely, manufacturing and supplying standard light bulbs, lamp bases and lampshades on a wholesale basis to supermarkets, garden centres, DIY stores, department stores and office equipment suppliers: The first thing to note is that s10(1) of the 2007 Act will only apply to those products[1] which are likely to be used in domestic premises. While this cannot be gleaned from a literal interpretation of s10(1), it is clear, from the long title of the Act, that Parliament did not intend for this tax to apply to products sold for use in non-domestic premises[2]. Therefo re, I would advise the Company to request a tax exemption for all those products sold to retailers who will sell them for use in commercial premises[3], and a tax reduction for those goods sold to retailers who are unable to determine whether or not the products are more or less likely to be sold for use in domestic premises[4]. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Environmental Taxes Act" essay for you Create order In regard to those products which are likely to be sold for use in domestic premises, the first question to be determined is whether or not the standard light bulbs, standard lamp bases and/or standard lampshades manufactured by the Company can be classed as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ for the purposes of s10(1) of the 2007 Act. For the purposes of s10(1) a à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ means: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Any item (or component of an item) which is not environmentally friendly and where the following conditions are satisfied: (1) An alternative item (or component) to the one in question is available at the time of sale or such an alternative item (or component) could be manufactured at no significant additional cost to the manufacturer; and (2) The said alternative item would be regarded as environmentally friendly under this Act.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Let us assess each type of product that the Company manufactures, in turn, to de termine whether or not they are likely to be classed as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ under the 2007 Act: The Standard Light Bulbs: Assuming that these light bulbs would not be classed under the Act as being à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"environmentally friendlyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, it appears that the sale of these products would attract an additional 3% tax, in accordance with s10(1) of the 2007 Act, because (i) there is an alternative product on the market; and (ii) this alternative product is energy saving, and thus, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"environmentally friendlyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. Additionally, the Company has admitted that the cost of manufacturing these alternative light bulbs is not significantly greater than the cost of manufacturing its existing light bulbs, and so even if no alternative could be identified as being à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"on saleà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, the first limb of the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ test would be satisfied. The St andard Lamp Bases: Again, we must assume, because these lamps cannot facilitate the use of energy-saving bulbs, that they will not be considered à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"environmentally friendlyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ for the purposes of the 2007 Act. However, it is not clear whether or not there are already available in the marketplace standard lamps ready to accommodate the energy-efficient bulbs. If such alternatives do exist, then the sale of the non-environmentally friendly lamps would likely attract the 3% surplus tax because (i) an alternative product is on sale in the market; and (ii) this alternative product is energy saving in that it facilitates the use of energy saving light bulbs, and may therefore be considered à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"environmentally friendlyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. If there are no such alternatives for sale in the marketplace, then the test as to whether or not the existing lamps will be classed as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ hinges on (i) how much of the  £1,560,000 (the sum estimated to be required in order to commence the manufacture of environmentally friendly lamp bases and lampshades) will need to be allocated to the manufacture and production of the environmentally friendly lamp bases, only; and (ii) whether or not this additional manufacturing cost would be classed as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"significantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ for the purposes of the 2007 Act. In the absence of the information required to answer enquiry (i), it is not possible to provide a definitive answer to enquiry (ii). However, we can provide the following insight into what, for the purposes of the 2007 Act, might be considered à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"significantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ additional cost: It is likely that the test for significance will develop with a strong subjective element, i.e. an enquiry will be made into how significant the additional cost would be for the Company in question[5]. An example of the Courts inferring a subjective element i nto the definition of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"significantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ can be seen in the case of McCafferty v Metropolitan Police District Receiver [1977] 1 WLR 1073, 1081. For example, if the total additional cost involved in preparing for the manufacture of the modified environmentally-friendly lamp bases accounts for half of the estimated total additional expense of  £1,560,000, i.e.  £780,000, then this additional cost would represent 10.4% of the Companyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s total annual turnover [ £7.5 million]. Any reasonable Company would consider an additional expense representing over 10% of the Companyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s total annual turnover to be significant. On this basis, I would advise that the Company would be able to argue that it should not pay the 3% surplus tax on the manufacture and sale of its standard (non-environmentally friendly) lamp bases because it would cost significantly more to prepare for the manufacture of the environmentally-f riendly alternatives. If the significance of these additional manufacturing costs are disputed, then I would advise the company to make the following, additional, argument: If the Company was to manufacture the alternative environmentally-friendly version of the product, research demonstrates conclusively that it would not be able to charge its customers more money for each lamp. This means that the resultant profit margin available on each lamp will inevitably decrease (because the manufacturing cost per unit will increase while the R.R.P. will have to remain the same). This means that, over the same volume of annual sales, the profits realized by the Company will decrease, and these profits should be accounted for when calculating the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"significanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ of the additional costs for the purposes of s10(3) of the 2007 Act[6]. The Standard Lampshades: Assuming that the standard lampshades would not be considered à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"environmentally friendlyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ for the purposes of the 2007 Act, then the position in regard to whether these will be classed as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ is the same as that described above in relation to the standard lamp bases currently manufactured by the Company. Opinion in regard to the tax status of stock which existed prior to the Act coming into force: I have been informed that, at the time the Act came into force, the Company was in possession of approximately  £200,000 of product stock. I would advise the Company to sell this stock into the commercial sector where it is unlikely to be used in domestic premises. In this way the Company can seek a valid exemption from s10(3) of the 2007 Act. References/ Bibliography: A v Hoare others [2008] UKHL 6 Grey v Pearson (1857) 6 HL Cas 1 McCafferty v Metrop olitan Police District Receiver [1977] 1 WLR 1073 EC Defective Product Directive, Directive 85/374/EEC Heydonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Case (1584) 3 Co Rep 7a Footnotes [1] While the 2007 Act does not provide a working definition of what will be considered a à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"productà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ for the purposes of the Act, having reviewed the definition of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"productà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ as contained in Article 2 of the EC Defective Product Directive, Directive 85/374/EEC3, it seems highly unlikely that the Company would be able to argue that any of the items it manufactures are not à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. [2] This type of statutory interpretation is known as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"the mischief ruleà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, a term originally coined in Heydonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Case (1584) 3 Co Rep 7a. [3] For example, those products sold to office equipment suppliers. [4] E.g. Those products which are sold to DIY or department stores. [5] It should be noted that the standard is likely to remain impersonal, i.e. it will not matter whether or not the Company actually believes the additional expense to be significant . What will matter is whether or not a reasonable company in the same position as the Company in question would regard the additional expense as being à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"significantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ This point has been clarified at law by the House of Lords on the case of A v Hoare others [2008] UKHL 6, at para. 34. [6] A literal interpretation of the wording of the definition of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"qualifying productsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ does not preclude loss of profits being taken into account when calculating the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“additional cost to the manufacturerà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . A case authority for the validity of this approach to statutory interpretation is provided by the case of Grey v Pearson (1857) 6 HL Cas 1, in which Lord Wensleydale stated: [T]he grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is to be adhered to, unless that would lead to some absurdity In this case, it is certainly not absurd to include losses of profits in assessments of total cost.