Leadership Styles Differ From One - 1185 Words

Degree: Module: Lecturer: Coursework: Name: Year: How leadership styles differ from one MNC to another what factors contribute to its success? Word Count: 2,500 Word Limit: (Bossidy Charan, 2002). A viable individual procedure will deliver precise evaluation of the individual which leads the system into creating and distinguishing future leaders, and coming up with an ‘ability pool’ to fill future positions. Hence all in all I will now introduce the above mentioned leadership styles and concepts and apply them to various Multinational Companies and with the help of Primary and Secondary research methods will deduce which strategy yields highest success rates. Though, leadership style remains†¦show more content†¦This will incorporate the coursework we have studied within the paradigms of this course to the max and will elaborate the entire method that I’ll be using to conduct my research regarding leadership styles practiced in the Multinational Companies like Toyota and Honda whilst simultaneously analyzing different factors that lead to success of these companies. For this I’ll be using the following methods as listed below as well as I’ll be making a two day trip to their outlets and workplaces here in Pakistan for one-to-one interviews and observations. Primarily, I’ll make use of the Positivist methodology of conducting out research which reinforces the objectivity of social reality (ontological) and methodological which simply means that the results sought after the research can easily be generalized to not only just the sample size but the entire

Challenges in Conservation Ecotourism

Question: Discuss about the Challenges in Conservation Ecotourism. Answer: Introduction A quick glance at the website of Australian Department of Environment and Energy makes one think that conservation is of great concern to both state and federal authorities. However, the dismal funding to ecotourism and conservation in general reveals something else. The current civilization is precipitating to a devastating effect on the worlds ecological system and Australia alike (Pye, 2016, pp. 1). Tourism is the epitome of current civilization and its wreaking havoc to pristine natural tourist areas. Over the years, local authorities and federal agencies have been mounting feeble campaigns on the need to conserve tourist sites and maintain their natural state; giving birth to the concept of ecotourism (Spies et al., 2012, pp.1-2). Unlike mass tourism, ecotourism emphasizes on recognizing the culture of the area or region of focus, the natural history of its setting without introducing changes to the integrity of the inherent ecosystem. According to Hobbs and Saunders, eds. (2012 , pp. 29), the wait for everyones participation in the reversal of the rapidly degrading ecology is long overdue. It entails the intrinsic wisdom and implied ethics that by transforming man from enemy to partner, the world would realize self-sustenance. For that reason, involving the tourists in the management and maintenance of the ecosystem is a positive input towards ensuring sustained conservation of the sites they visit. Ecotourism, even though appealing, is challenging to implement and uphold for various reasons explored in this essay. Explanation on Conservation Challenges One of the major challenges dragging Australia behind in its ecotourism conservation efforts is the lack of recognition of the importance of the abundant natural resources in the country. Australia is well endowed with natural gifts that remain untapped of their potential. In a conference held in Noosa, Queensland, it was noted that Australia rivals Costa Rica and New Zealand in natural resource endowment. The only difference is the lack of recognition of the value the ecological sites have in Australia. In addition, there is laxity from the side of the government in awareness creation of ecotourism benefits leading to the low adoption of ecotourism principles (Lindenmayer Gibbons (2012, pp. 1-4). Limited funding has also been a major deterrent to the development of Australian ecotourism sites. According to the Nature Parks Australia website, the government budget for ecotourism was $58 million in 2016. Over the years, the sector has been receiving considerably little amounts annually. It has been argued that the $58 million allocated was too little too late. Conservation of ecotourism parks is an expensive undertaking. The inadequacy of financial resources is likely to render the quarterly plans meaningless. Financing the training undertaken by guides is expensive. Inadequate funding translates to having fewer numbers of trained personnel and a subsequent reduction of the numbers of tourists admitted into the park. This has been reported as one of the most profound challenges park managers face (Spies et al., 2012, pp.1). Unlike New Zealand and Costa Rica, the Australian government has not enforced stricter standards and by-laws to regulate the practice of ecotourism. For example in Costa Rica, there are certain areas that are strictly out of bounds for visitors when not accompanied by trained guides. This has not been embraced in Australia and the consequent effect is a frequently disturbed natural ecosystem, thereby frustrating the conservation efforts (Dowling and Page, 2002, pp. 7). Similarly, the regulations limiting the number of tourists entering a park at a point in time have not been fully implemented. Implementing such regulations will require that the authorities get a better understanding on the maximum number of tourists each park can accommodate in full capacity per day. This is something the managements in various parks in Australia have not done. The long-standing history of ecotourism and improper management of parks reveals the absence of a thorough conservation plan. Literature review shows that conservation of the natural sites has followed a rather disorderly approach that involves sporadic short-term studies and implementation of inconsistent and ineffective recommendations to address the long-term needs of countrys ecosystem. Some studies done in the past have not candidly evaluated the countrys tourism resources since the early 1970s to arouse enough interest to catalog and classify all potential ecotourism sites (Dowling and Page, 2002, pp. 8). Subsequent studies focused on the impact of tourism and its multiplier effects. However, the impact assessment vital to creating environmental awareness and subsequent stratagems for conservation remain poorly researched, hence the perceived lack of basis for substantial budgetary allocations. Tourism multiplier effects tend to focus more on job creation and the general improv ement and welfare of the lives of local communities; these are all positive. The ecotourism will profit more increased growth if more studies were to focus on the ability of the management to utilize locally available resources in the conservation plan (Australia, 2011, pp. 56). Like many other countries, Australia conservation efforts have been plagued by antagonistic politics. Conservation interests perceive tourism as a valuable tool in conservation plans. On the other hand, tourism interests perceive conservation as means of developing and promoting tourism in the country. Conservation promoters have the desire to see more tourists locked out of the protected areas (Australia, 2006, pp. 12). This contrasts to tourism interests seeking to have more visitors in the restricted areas; thereby creating a stand-off in terms of approach and policies to be followed. Additionally, there are various minor divisions between various conservation interests in the private and the state controlled organisations which frustrate the conservations efforts. Similarly, disagreements have been registered between different tourism interests including commercial tour operators, non-state recreational groups and coordinators of different recreational activities (Buckley, 2004, pp. 76-78). Lastly, land tenure and use is a factor which has its roots in politics, both in the local and the global platforms. Australias parks are under government jurisdiction with the exception of parks occupying federal lands or co-managed by the state and the private sector. Some of the co-managed parks include World Heritage Areas as well as parks occupying Aboriginal lands. In addition, public forests are equally under the jurisdiction of the state just like provincial forests in Canada. Comparatively, the US is doing a commendable job in fronting its natural ecosystems as world tourist destination areas compared to Australia. Only Western Australia and Tasmania have intentionally encouraged tourism and tourism supporting activities unlike the six remaining states and regions. In this other states, the state forests are used for amusement in an informal way. This limits the governments hand in establishing formal management teams and financing of conservation activities (Davidson et al. , 2012, pp. 4). Integration of scientific evidence and insights While taking into account the local economic development, the state agencies need to augment the participation of indigenous communities within diverse ecotourism enterprises. Surveys in countries such as Costa Rica, New Zealand, and Nepal, have shown involvement of local groups in active ecotourism, living standards exponentially rise. The negative sociocultural impacts of ecotourism do not come as when they haphazardly affect the livelihoods of locals (Australia, 2011, pp. 58). Lack of data and minimal research in ecotourism has also been impeding conservation efforts in Australia. This has been associated with minimal spending by government on ecotourism management and conservation. Without adequate research, it is difficult for the Australian government to design rating systems for most of the self-proclaimed ecotourism operatives. In some countries, such systems are used to accord a ranking to each ecotourism operator, revealing the extent of environmental sensitivity in its activities. The absence of such a system makes it extremely harder for Australian ecotourism providers to align themselves with tour operators and other conservation agencies in their area of operation. In addition, minimal research has been cited as the main reason for the superficial approach to the marketing of ecotourism; further depressing conservation efforts in the country (Weaver, 2008, pp. 79). Conclusion In conclusion, acknowledging the importance of the abundant natural resources in Australia is important to sustenance, protection, and preservation of ecology and protection of Australias rich floral and faunal ecosystem. As such, Australian ecotourism programs must incorporate the locals in sensitizing ecotourists that even the most vaunted industrial and agricultural achievements draw their support from the ecology whose base is weakening on an annual basis. More benefits of a well-managed ecosystem are seen in increased possibility of local communities earning a livelihood because it promotes local ownership as well as the management and control of nearly every service used by the guests. Homegrown establishments and operatives serve the visiting people as opposed to foreign investment and management enterprises. As such, it is important for all the stakeholders to understand what environmental conservation is all about. It may comprise of tiny components that may be wrongly judge d insignificant. Above all, it is important for humanity to understand nature which is all about co-existence. According to the laws of nature, there is no such thing as individual life because there is no organism that can live on its own. It needs support from other organisms and the environment in general. The interaction between the many species of life as well as with their physical life yields the chemicals pivotal in supporting and sustaining life. This brings out the whole concept of symbiosis which advocates for the collectivity of cells, organs and even systems. Symbiotic relationships are fundamentally important because they support the existence of human beings both directly and indirectly. The inadequacy of financial resources is likely to render the quarterly plans meaningless. Financing and training of tour guides, though expensive needs to be given maximal attention to increase the numbers of trained personnel and a subsequent increase in the numbers of tourists admitted into the park at a point in time. A thorough conservation plan is also long overdue. As noted earlier, the approach given to conservation investigations is rather disorderly and sporadic short-term leading to inconsistent and ineffective redress of conservation efforts; translating research into actionable plans can help breach the gap. The land tenure and use rooted in politics needs an urgent redress to ensure that conservations efforts are not constrained. References Australia, E., 2006. Ecotourism Australia.website, viewed online,25. Australia, E., 2011. Welcome to Ecotourism Australia. Buckley, R., 2004. Partnerships in ecotourism: Australian political frameworks.International Journal of Tourism Research,6(2), pp.75-83. Davidson, A.D., Detling, J.K. and Brown, J.H., 2012. Ecological roles and conservation challenges of social, burrowing, herbivorous mammals in the world's grasslands.Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment,10(9), pp.477-486. Dowling, R. and Page, S., 2002. Ecotourism.Essex: Pearson. Hobbs, R.J., and Saunders, D. eds., 2012.Reintegrating Fragmented landscapes: towards sustainable production and nature conservation. Springer Science Business Media. Lindenmayer, D., Gibbons, P. (2012).Biodiversity monitoring in Australia. CSIRO PUBLISHING. Pye, E., 2016. Challenges of conservation.Science Museum Group Journal,6(06). Spies, T.A., Lindenmayer, D.B., Gill, A.M., Stephens, S.L. and Agee, J.K., 2012. Challenges and a checklist for biodiversity conservation in fire-prone forests: Perspectives from the Pacific Northwest of the USA and Southeastern Australia.Biological Conservation,145(1), pp.5-14. Weaver, D., 2008. Ecotourism. Australia.