1) The opportunity I would like to pursue is to reduce the number of governmental certifications for a business, particularly in environmental laboratories.
2) The hypothesis for this opportunity is:
a. The environmental laboratories in the United States are hindered by the rules and regulations of the federal government, which impact their competitiveness, because the maintaining of yearly certifications are expensive and cut into productive working time.
3) Testing the who: The ‘who’ is not only applied to environmental laboratories, but any business that requires federal certifications for licensing reasons. For example, some of these other businesses include startup companies, healthcare, and any business owner. They are all required to pass and complete the federal certification processes in order to run their business and being a working employee.
Testing the what: The ‘what’ is an opportunity such as this one is the governmental regulations. These regulations are the driving force behind this opportunity. Also, the customers and clients who abide by the same regulations as the businesses are a part of the ‘what.’
Testing the why: The ‘why’ in this situation is developed from the competitiveness of these companies in lieu the government’s appearance and role. As mentioned already, the governmental regulations are the root of this opportunity. In reality, it is a “survival of the fittest” scenario, where stronger businesses outlast the weaker ones in terms of profit made. This is representative of an industry overload.
4) For this part, I have conducted interviews with employees in the environmental laboratories. My mom used to be the President of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, playing an active role in marine-biological research. The people I chose for the interview were some of her past co-workers. In my interview, I asked the interviewees questions in regard to the ‘who,’ ‘what,’, and ‘why’ of this opportunity. As a collective whole, they agreed that the governmental regulations for re-certifying are overwhelming and quite extortionate. This opportunity is highly needed in order for a less stressful and more productive work environment to prevail. One piece of information I had learned about the opportunity is how common this issue of government regulations is for the workers in this field. I knew that the problem existed, but I did not know how well aware the workers were of it. Some of them are prepared to action in order to reduce these regulations. Staff members I interviewed each had a different perspective, based on their job position. Essentially more work and less income and lower quality because supplies and chemicals sometimes couldn’t be ordered. Laboratory directors and managers had to not only watch their budgets closely but motivate their staff to work extra hard even overtime without pay. Quality assurance Managers had to sign their names to reports that they knew did not meet top quality standards. The labs were a commercial entity and had sales representatives selling the services of the lab. They were compensated by the lab tests they sold and contracts they were awarded on a commissioned/salary. They were the first point of contact with the client so when quality started to decline, they took the heat. The lab accountants had to generate client invoices then when payment was received pay the lab operating bills. Sometimes this person and the director would have to pick and choose which bill took priority. Payroll had to come first because if the staff wasn’t paid no one would be able to do the work. Clients, some of whom were governed by the same agencies as the labs, also saw the effect: they weren’t getting reports on time and some reports were rejected by the agency they reported to, or they were fined. Harbor Branch did not succumb to lower prices. They stayed firm and when clients left for lower priced labs, they quickly learned how much those lower prices were costing them in fines and retesting and quickly came back to Harbor Branch at higher prices.
Hi Brent,
ReplyDeleteGreat choice on opportunity here. You seem well educated and passionate about this issue (and you should be, I'm not a fan of big government regulation either). This is an especially important issue now with the call for more research on climate change and such, and I think if you continue on with this, hopefully you'll be able to show people how too much government intervention and certification requirements and all that may be hindering the work of companies that could make a real difference. I'm interested to see what happens with your opportunity as we progress in this class.
Hello Brent, good work on your testing the hypothesis, part 1. It looks like you put a decent amount of time on this assignment and did thorough research on your hypothesis. I agree that government should be more balanced in business' matters and I believe the key is discovering the right balance. I think with less intervention it a lot of companies would be able to answer to the call for climate change and might even be able to solve it. Good work overall!!
ReplyDeleteHello Brent,
ReplyDeleteI love the opportunity you have decided to test. The hypothesis is very complete and easy to grasp, and you seem to test it well. I personally agree with the why's you have presented and I believe your opportunity to be very useful and prosperous for our society with the way our future is going and how big of a role nature will play.