17.05.2017 Views

Pan-Pacific Conference XXXIV. Designing New Business Models in Developing Economies

This publication represents the Proceedings of the 34th Annual Pan-Pacific Conference being held in Lima, Peru May 29-31, 2017. The Pan-Pacific Conference has served as an important forum for the exchange of ideas and information for promoting understanding and cooperation among the peoples of the world since 1984. Last year, we had a memorable conference in Miri, Malaysia, in cooperation with Curtin University Sarawak, under the theme of “Building a Smart Society through Innovation and Co-creation.” Professor Pauline Ho served as Chair of the Local Organizing Committee, with strong leadership support of Pro Vice-Chancellor Professor Jim Mienczakowski and Dean Jonathan Winterton.

This publication represents the Proceedings of the 34th Annual Pan-Pacific Conference being held in Lima, Peru May 29-31, 2017. The Pan-Pacific Conference has served as an important forum for the exchange of ideas and information for promoting understanding and cooperation among the peoples of the world since 1984. Last year, we had a memorable conference in Miri, Malaysia, in cooperation with Curtin University Sarawak, under the theme of “Building a Smart Society through Innovation and Co-creation.” Professor Pauline Ho served as Chair of the Local Organizing Committee, with strong leadership support of Pro Vice-Chancellor Professor Jim Mienczakowski and Dean Jonathan Winterton.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

TABLE 1: Rank<strong>in</strong>g of sills requirements (2016/2012)<br />

2016 2012<br />

Rank Skills Item Mean Std. Dev Rank Skills Item Mean Std. Dev<br />

1 Problem solv<strong>in</strong>g 3.67 .563 1 Ability to plan and prioritise 3.70 .518<br />

2 Ability to see big picture 3.64 .558 2 Customer focus 3.68 .516<br />

3 Team work 3.63 .550 3 Ability to see big picture 3.66 .500<br />

4 Communication skills 3.62 .588 4 <strong>Bus<strong>in</strong>ess</strong> ethics 3.63 .530<br />

5 Ability to plan and prioritise 3.61 .623 5 Team work 3.60 .558<br />

6 <strong>Bus<strong>in</strong>ess</strong> ethics 3.60 .625 6 Problem solv<strong>in</strong>g 3.60 .588<br />

7 Ability to th<strong>in</strong>k outside the box 3.57 .639 7 Ability to th<strong>in</strong>k outside the box 3.56 .521<br />

8 Decision mak<strong>in</strong>g 3.54 .610 8 Communication skills 3.55 .565<br />

9 Customer focus 3.53 .653 9 Decision mak<strong>in</strong>g 3.55 .575<br />

10 <strong>Bus<strong>in</strong>ess</strong> process improvement 3.46 .632 10 <strong>Bus<strong>in</strong>ess</strong> process improvement 3.51 .607<br />

11 Cross-functional coord<strong>in</strong>ation skills 3.45 .682 11 Cross-functional coord<strong>in</strong>ation skills 3.45 .613<br />

12 Leadership 3.39 .675 12 Inventory management 3.42 .657<br />

13 WHS/MH management 3.37 .651 13 WHS/MH management 3.40 .697<br />

14 Supply cha<strong>in</strong> cost knowledge 3.34 .732 14 Supply cha<strong>in</strong> cost knowledge 3.39 .698<br />

15 Inventory management 3.33 .711 15 Demand forecast<strong>in</strong>g 3.36 .734<br />

16 Motivation skills 3.33 .682 16 Change management 3.34 .614<br />

17 Knowledge of the <strong>in</strong>dustry 3.32 .719 17 Leadership 3.32 .681<br />

18 Negotiat<strong>in</strong>g skill 3.31 .770 18 Spreadsheet abilities 3.31 .700<br />

19 Change management 3.30 .801 19 Quality management 3.30 .770<br />

20 Demand forecast<strong>in</strong>g 3.30 .767 20 Knowledge of the <strong>in</strong>dustry 3.27 .656<br />

21 Quantitative and/or statistical skills 3.28 .752 21 Transport management 3.25 .750<br />

22 Quality management 3.26 .727 22 Supply cha<strong>in</strong> design 3.25 .730<br />

23 Transport management 3.26 .737 23 Negotiat<strong>in</strong>g skill 3.24 .706<br />

24 Supply cha<strong>in</strong> design 3.24 .750 24 Motivation skills 3.23 .607<br />

25 Procurement/Purchas<strong>in</strong>g 3.20 .762 25 Procurement/Purchas<strong>in</strong>g 3.22 .788<br />

26 Reverse logistics 3.20 .744 26 Reverse logistics 3.18 .739<br />

27 Spreadsheet abilities 3.20 .780 27 IT skills / software knowledge 3.15 .709<br />

28 IT skills / software knowledge 3.14 .754 28 Laws & regulations 3.11 .767<br />

29 Laws & regulations 3.09 .774 29 Quantitative and/or statistical skills 3.11 .698<br />

30 Green logistics/ environmental issues 3.05 .756 30 Green logistics/ environmental issues 3.08 .734<br />

Figure 1 represents the work experience (from both<br />

years) respondents believe is required to fill positions<br />

<strong>in</strong> the three ma<strong>in</strong> managerial levels. Although it is<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicated that work experience is important at all<br />

levels, it also shows that a higher emphasis is placed<br />

on work experience than before, particularly so at<br />

tactical and strategic level. This appears to <strong>in</strong>dicate<br />

that exist<strong>in</strong>g role players do not have sufficient<br />

experience to be able to fulfil requirements of their<br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g positions and that more practical experience<br />

is required to provide them with the skills they need<br />

to perform their functions <strong>in</strong> the supply cha<strong>in</strong>.<br />

Fig 2 Perceptions of educational requirements<br />

Both practitioners’ surveys <strong>in</strong>dicated that bus<strong>in</strong>esses<br />

are f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it particular difficult to fill positions at the<br />

higher management levels, i.e. tactical and strategic<br />

positions. The majority of the respondents <strong>in</strong> 2016<br />

clearly <strong>in</strong>dicated the relative ease of fill<strong>in</strong>g<br />

operational level (73%) and tactical level (53%)<br />

positions, however an average of 57% <strong>in</strong>dicated that<br />

it was difficult to fill strategical level positions. It<br />

would seem that for all three managerial levels,<br />

positions are becom<strong>in</strong>g somewhat less challeng<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

fill as previous trends <strong>in</strong>dicate. Despite this apparent<br />

trend, the results <strong>in</strong>dicate that supply cha<strong>in</strong><br />

organisations struggle to f<strong>in</strong>d appropriate leadership<br />

for their organisations. Figure 3 <strong>in</strong>dicated the<br />

difficulty to fill managerial level positions over the<br />

Fig 1 Perceptions of required work experience<br />

two year period.<br />

Figure 3 Difficulty <strong>in</strong> fill<strong>in</strong>g positions<br />

Figure 2 represents the qualifications respondents<br />

from both surveys believe are required to fill<br />

positions <strong>in</strong> the three ma<strong>in</strong> managerial levels. The<br />

results shows that some level of education is required<br />

at all levels, with the requirements for tactical and<br />

strategic level positions <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g, with tertiary<br />

education becom<strong>in</strong>g more vital. The 2016 results also<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicated more emphasis on post graduate<br />

qualification requirements for strategic positions.<br />

Similarly to work experience, the results <strong>in</strong>dicate that<br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g qualifications are <strong>in</strong>sufficient to deliver the<br />

skills that are required for job performance and<br />

companies are mitigat<strong>in</strong>g this by requir<strong>in</strong>g higher<br />

qualifications.<br />

Not only are practitioners f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it difficult to f<strong>in</strong>d<br />

suitable candidates to fill tactical and strategic level<br />

positions, respondents generally <strong>in</strong>dicated that supply<br />

cha<strong>in</strong> education are not adequately prepar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

students for jobs <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustry.<br />

Respondents were asked to <strong>in</strong>dicate those areas of<br />

competencies were students are well-prepared.<br />

Generally speak<strong>in</strong>g the respondents <strong>in</strong>dicated that<br />

candidates do not have sufficient levels of preparation<br />

<strong>in</strong> most of the “hard” and “soft” skill areas, clearly<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g a failure of current supply cha<strong>in</strong> education<br />

offer<strong>in</strong>gs to meet the requirements for chang<strong>in</strong>g<br />

technical skills as well as the well-documented “soft”<br />

skills. The results are <strong>in</strong>dicated <strong>in</strong> Figure 4.<br />

139

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!