1. What opportunity in the environment suggests that collaboration among a number of parties will be necessary?A. The need for technical standards and interoperability in RFIDB. The trend toward online marketing and fulfillment of groceriesC. The polarization of wealth and incomes, reducing the middle classD. The increased baby-boomer populationE. The “offshoring” of labor2. Your book stresses the importance of the “boundaryless” organizational design. With regard to the Metro Group, this structure is achieved via a(n)a. Acquisitionb. Backward vertical integrationc. Multiparty strategic allianced. Internal developmente. Forward vertical integration3. Why would Metro Group choose this particular corporate-level strategy over others?A. To assemble all of the components via M&A would be very difficult as some firms are large (e.g., Intel) and many firms would need to be acquired.B. Only one value chain activity (technology development) is needed, not the entire organization.C. Some of the technologies are not likely part of the Metro Group core competencesD. Even if it were possible to develop them internally, the technologies might take a long time to develop.E. All of the above4. Suggest intangible resources (strengths) that the Metro Group leveraged to successfully execute this particular corporate-level strategy.A. Excellent relationships with technology suppliers, including Intel’s experience in building R&D collaborationsB. A physical space (the stripped-down Future Store) in which experimentation, learning, and integration of knowledge might occur.C. The data analytics algorithms the Metro Group utilized to streamline its operations.D. a & b onlyE. All of the above5. How is the FSI structured to support the integration of knowledge from various sources?A. Teams are an integrative device.B. The hierarchy is an integrative device.C. Being present on-site (collocated) helps with collaboration.D. Being colocated in a stripped-down store (a discursive space) facilitates collaborationE. All of the above6. How does the way FSI is structured support the experimentation and learning necessary to build an innovative new store?A. It continuously introduces new partners into the allianceB. Metro Group was the world’s third largest retail chain at the timeC. Metro Group continued to set new challengesD. The FSI takes on a matrix organizational formE. It is decentralized, permitting partners considerable latitude **Instructions**The German METRO Group¹, the world's third largest retail chain at the time, decided that a way to differentiate itself from its competition was to apply more technology in its stores. In conjunction with Intel, one of its major technology suppliers, in 2001 it came up with the Future Store Initiative (FSI). At FSI, the partners intended to build the supermarket of the future in a real-life setting.More than 50 partners were invited to contribute their ideas and technologies. METRO was careful to invite only those partners it knew well. Moreover, when certain competencies were missing, METRO relied upon partners to bring in their best relationships, leading friends of friends to join the network.A critical technological issue facing the firms was the development of an RFID (radio frequency identification) standard and interoperability for supermarkets. The new standard would open up a new market, allowing the technology partners to sell new technologies into the supermarket sector. Moreover, partners were invited to contribute any ideas that might enhance the shopping experience. Partners proposed technologies such as personal shopping assistants, intelligent scales, self-checkout, electronic advertising displays, and information terminals. The Future Store Initiative also represented an opportunity for partners to demonstrate their technologies in practice. Some leading firms which took part in the alliance:- **Technology**: RFID **Firm**: Checkpoint - **Technology**: Retail Technology **Firm**: Mettler Toledo - **Technology**: Brands (consumer goods) **Firms**: Coke, Danone, Henkel - **Technology**: IT tech. & service **Firms**: Cisco, Fujitsu, IBM, Siemens - **Technology**: Software **Firms**: Microsoft, SAP, Oracle - **Technology**: Other **Firms**: Accenture, DHL, Visa ¹ Please note that METRO Group referred to here relates to the situation at the time of this initiative. Three levels of partnership were defined: Platinum, Gold, and Silver. Partners were also asked to make a financial contribution to the project which financed the marketing of project outcomes. However, partners were free to decide on how much staff and resources they would make available. People working for the Initiative were also required to be present on-site.An executive committee was created consisting of Platinum partners and METRO. Four project teams were also created, focusing upon the four areas for innovation identified by the Initiative: comfort shopping, smart checkout, in-store information, and supply chain management. A METRO project manager headed each project team. Multiple innovation projects were performed within each project team, and each innovation project had its own project manager.In 2002 an existing store was stripped and an aggressive target for reopening it (April 2003) was set. To keep the network vital, METRO continued to set new challenges, such as creating an RFID center to showcase technologies. It also introduced new partners into the alliance, keeping the alliance fresh, gaining access to new ideas, and signaling to existing partners that they could not rest on their laurels.1. de Man, D & de Man, A-P. 2013. Alliances: The executive guide to designing strategic partnerships

Business Environment The business environment can be defined as all of the internal and external…

Answered: What opportunity in the environment…

Understanding Business

12th Edition

ISBN:9781259929434

Author:William Nickels

Publisher:William Nickels

Chapter1: Taking Risks And Making Profits Within The Dynamic Business Environment

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1CE

See similar textbooks

Related questions

Question

1. What opportunity in the environment suggests that collaboration among a number of parties will be necessary?

A. The need for technical standards and interoperability in RFID

B. The trend toward online marketing and fulfillment of groceries

C. The polarization of wealth and incomes, reducing the middle class

D. The increased baby-boomer population

E. The “offshoring” of labor

2. Your book stresses the importance of the “boundaryless” organizational design. With regard to the Metro Group, this structure is achieved via a(n)

a. Acquisition

b. Backward vertical integration

c. Multiparty strategic alliance

d. Internal development

e. Forward vertical integration

3. Why would Metro Group choose this particular corporate-level strategy over others?

A. To assemble all of the components via M&A would be very difficult as some firms are large (e.g., Intel) and many firms would need to be acquired.

B. Only one value chain activity (technology development) is needed, not the entire organization.

C. Some of the technologies are not likely part of the Metro Group core competences

D. Even if it were possible to develop them internally, the technologies might take a long time to develop.

E. All of the above

4. Suggest intangible resources (strengths) that the Metro Group leveraged to successfully execute this particular corporate-level strategy.

A. Excellent relationships with technology suppliers, including Intel’s experience in building R&D collaborations

B. A physical space (the stripped-down Future Store) in which experimentation, learning, and integration of knowledge might occur.

C. The data analytics algorithms the Metro Group utilized to streamline its operations.

D. a & b only

E. All of the above

5. How is the FSI structured to support the integration of knowledge from various sources?

A. Teams are an integrative device.

B. The hierarchy is an integrative device.

C. Being present on-site (collocated) helps with collaboration.

D. Being colocated in a stripped-down store (a discursive space) facilitates collaboration

E. All of the above

6. How does the way FSI is structured support the experimentation and learning necessary to build an innovative new store?

A. It continuously introduces new partners into the alliance

B. Metro Group was the world’s third largest retail chain at the time

C. Metro Group continued to set new challenges

D. The FSI takes on a matrix organizational form

E. It is decentralized, permitting partners considerable latitude

**Instructions**

The German METRO Group¹, the world's third largest retail chain at the time, decided that a way to differentiate itself from its competition was to apply more technology in its stores. In conjunction with Intel, one of its major technology suppliers, in 2001 it came up with the Future Store Initiative (FSI). At FSI, the partners intended to build the supermarket of the future in a real-life setting.

More than 50 partners were invited to contribute their ideas and technologies. METRO was careful to invite only those partners it knew well. Moreover, when certain competencies were missing, METRO relied upon partners to bring in their best relationships, leading friends of friends to join the network.

A critical technological issue facing the firms was the development of an RFID (radio frequency identification) standard and interoperability for supermarkets. The new standard would open up a new market, allowing the technology partners to sell new technologies into the supermarket sector. Moreover, partners were invited to contribute any ideas that might enhance the shopping experience. Partners proposed technologies such as personal shopping assistants, intelligent scales, self-checkout, electronic advertising displays, and information terminals. The Future Store Initiative also represented an opportunity for partners to demonstrate their technologies in practice. Some leading firms which took part in the alliance:

- **Technology**: RFID
**Firm**: Checkpoint

- **Technology**: Retail Technology
**Firm**: Mettler Toledo

- **Technology**: Brands (consumer goods)
**Firms**: Coke, Danone, Henkel

- **Technology**: IT tech. & service
**Firms**: Cisco, Fujitsu, IBM, Siemens

- **Technology**: Software
**Firms**: Microsoft, SAP, Oracle

- **Technology**: Other
**Firms**: Accenture, DHL, Visa

¹ Please note that METRO Group referred to here relates to the situation at the time of this initiative.

Three levels of partnership were defined: Platinum, Gold, and Silver. Partners were also asked to make a financial contribution to the project which financed the marketing of project outcomes. However, partners were free to decide on how much staff and resources they would make available. People working for the Initiative were also required to be present on-site.

An executive committee was created consisting of Platinum partners and METRO. Four project teams were also created, focusing upon the four areas for innovation identified by the Initiative: comfort shopping, smart checkout, in-store information, and supply chain management. A METRO project manager headed each project team. Multiple innovation projects were performed within each project team, and each innovation project had its own project manager.

In 2002 an existing store was stripped and an aggressive target for reopening it (April 2003) was set. To keep the network vital, METRO continued to set new challenges, such as creating an RFID center to showcase technologies. It also introduced new partners into the alliance, keeping the alliance fresh, gaining access to new ideas, and signaling to existing partners that they could not rest on their laurels.

1. de Man, D & de Man, A-P. 2013. Alliances: The executive guide to designing strategic partnerships

Expert Solution

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here