What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to low-cost council services?
In what sense do borough councils compete? The councils must to show that they have the most efficient as well as cost effective plan and that it is sustainable so that their task won’t be given to a private company, or the opposing party.
Please respond to the 2 students forums that are posted below and include direct questions. The course is strategic marketing and the topic they wrote on is Business and Corporate Strategies. Responses should be a minimum of 100 words. Please do not combine responses. Response to each student to be addressed separately. A minimum of 100 words for each student. Letora wrote: 1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to low-cost council services? One of the major advantage to this strategy is to be able to offer a tailored service experience to those who need it. For customers to have the ability to decide how to best use the services is a better way to use government funds, versus getting generic options that the might not utilize which results wasting resources. Also the structure of the process is efficient and should keep prices low while delivering high quality services, which the down side of this move is that there is also the chance that the services would be lesser quality due to having less employees.. Another key advantage for the government to stream line the process with less personnel, which is cost effective, while on the other hand this can lead to over worked employees as well as hundreds of people loosing their jobs and the loss of revenue due to strikes. Another major disadvantage to this approach was the miscalculation of the overall cost of the program, also the program took longer to establish than initially anticipated. 2. In what sense do borough councils compete? The councils must to show that they have the most efficient as well as cost effective plan and that it is sustainable so that their task won’t be given to a private company, or the opposing party. Borough councils use a generic competitive strategy, these plan are stretched out over a long period of time. They also compete with other boroughs or similar companies satisfy stake holders which I would assume is the government, they also compete with companies in the private and public sectors for federal contracts. The councils compete by showing the benefits of their services thus building value. Jason wrote: Q1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to low-cost council services? I think that some of the advantages would be like they said about being like an airline that they can choose what service they would like to do and what they want to pay for instead of having a standard set fee for services you dont want. They would be able to save some money but not quite as much as they hoped but they were meeting their goal nonetheless. The main disadvantage is when Mr. Freer explained everything to the Guardian it sounded like that people would have different level of costs. The more money you spend or the more money you have the better the service you would be able to afford. I think that by letting people choose what service they wanted or what they would like to pay for they may not fully understand what they need or might want to be cheaper and get what they want instead of what they really needed, Q2. In what sense do borough councils compete? The areas that I think the borough councils would compete would be the retraining costs of building staff. They would also compete for hiring consultants and they would also compete for the delivery team. Another area I think that they might have to compete would be the savings. I think that most of the borough councils would like to see who can get the most savings or who would be able to get them closer to their goal of saving a ton of money. Over all I feel like they would only be competing for the same goal but I think it would have a positive effect on the area as a whole and only save the councils in the end