Friday, February 7, 2020
Modern Sense of Hero - Essay Example ... I need a hero, I'm holding out for a hero 'Til the end of the night. He's gotta be strong, And he's gotta be fresh from a fightSomewhere after midnight, In my wildest fantasyIts gonna take a superman to sweep me off my feetUp where the mountains meet the heavens above. Out where the lightning splits the sea Through the wind and the chill and the rain. And the storm and the flood, I can feel his approach(Steinman)." This concept of a hero comes to us from the fairy tales, comic strips, and movies that we have read and seen. The same acceptance occurred at its revival sung by Jennifer Saunders in the Animation Shrek that awakened this new generation to the "Hero"(Hero). A hero is described as good, ethereal and powerful like a God. He is strong and decides issues with the use of brute strength like Hercules. He has killed many and has survived battles. He will come and overcome all obstacles in the heavens and the seas. This is the Hero that is like Superman, who exists only in one's "wildest fantasy." This is the type of hero depicted in Greco-Roman Mythology. Jahnige and McMullen confirms the reason why they are myths is the fact that: "they had the gods to intervene for or against them; and in general they never existed as real people."(Jahnige 2) Added to this list of characteristics is that: "he must be of royal birth or be of half-god and half man lineage; he is of noble character which is close to perfectly ideal but for a fatal flaw; he fights for his honor; and his death must occur in an unusual way "(Norman 2). Are the character analysis of the Hero by Steinman and Pitchford, Jahnige and McMullen and Norman true To prove the veracity of their claims, these will be examined in the lives of Heracles of the Homeric Hymn and the Theogony; Odysseus Laertiades of the Odyssey and the Theogony; and, finally, Perseus. To sum up, a hero must be of royal birth, noble, strong, with a fatal flaw, fights for his honor, has done extraordinary feats, the presence or intervention of the god/s in his life, and he dies in an unusual way. Heracles is part human and part God. He is the son of Zeus (Theogony). Zeus came to Alcmene in the form of Amphitryon, the man she is to marry. He is therefore royalty. He is noble having wrestled the God of Death for the life of Alcestis the wife of his host. Euripides gives an account of Heracles statement: 'For I must save the woman newly dead, And set Alcestis in the house again, And render to Admetus good for good. I go. The sable-vestured King of Corpses, Death, will I watch for, and shall find, I trow, And if I lie in wait and dart from ambush. And seize, and with mine arm's coil compass him And make demand, I doubt not I shall lead Alcetis up, and give to mine host's hands . Who to his halls received, nor drove me thence." (Euripides: Alcestis) . he god intervention element is in the form of Hera. All through-out his life, even before his death Hera has made plans to end his life. Even his fatal flaw being easily angered was used by Hera to make him mad which led him to kill his wife and children. To redeem his honor he dutifully fulfills the twelve assigned tasks. His strength in character and physical built enabled him to finish the herculean task known as the Twelve Labours of Heracles. One of which is the killing of the water snake, Lernaean Hydra (Ilaid 323). Heracles did not die tragically, but he knew that he was about to die and he ordered the
Wednesday, January 29, 2020
The treaty of Versailles Essay The first dispute occurred in January 1919. A meeting was held at Versailles in France by the leaders of each country as to decide how to punish the Germans. The leaders who attended the meeting were Lloyd George, prime minister of England, Georges Clemenceau, prime minister of France, and Woodrow Wilson, president of America. They were also known as The Big Three However they disagreed with each others ideas. They each wanted something, which benefits themselves. Firstly, as the French were probably one of the worst victims of WWI. The prime minister of France wanted the German to be deeply punished. A request to have Germany demilitarized from the border of Germany to France and a restriction which Germans could only have 100000 men on their army. Also they wanted the Germany to pay all the reparations coursed during WWI. As well, he believed that Germany should be blamed for everything of what happened in WWI. Secondly, the British Prime Minister Lloyd George had different opinions to Clemenceaus points. The main reason was because England got everything they wanted from the war. First the German military got destabilized. Second, the German naval threat was gone and the British colonies arent threatened anymore. Englands punishments for Britain arent as harsh as the French. A restriction on Germans army and pay a large amount for reparation was all they wanted. This was mainly due to the fact that Germany was one of their big trading partners. If Germany was bankrupt, England wont benefit at all. Lloyd George declared if the treaty listened to Clemenceau, Germans would revenge in 25 years. Thirdly, the Americans had a total different idea. Woodrow Wilson believed that the factors, which caused WWI, werent all because of Germany. France and England should also be blamed for the cause of the war. Wilson considered that the Europeans diplomatic was too self-determined, they ignores the publics wishes or opinions. He also believed that the problems could only be solved if there is the relations between the countries were improved and a new self determined diplomatic government was being could be created through all the European countries. In conclusions, the main courses of the conflict during the The Big Three meeting were: firstly, the diplomatic relationships between the three countries, where the Americans hated the British, England and France also hated each other, they were only uniting before cause had to face a tough enemy. Secondly, the French wanted Germans to pay for more than what they caused, where England just wanted Germany to pay for a certain amount since they got exactly what wanted. Thirdly America had a totally different opinion to both of the other countries in the treaty, which was probably the major cause of the conflict.
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Ã Ã Ã Ã Ã Hi. My name is Edmund,now called Saint Edmund, the mart- yer. I was born in Surrey in 841. My mother was thought to have been royalty and my father died at a young age in was. When I was fourteen, I became the youngest King of the Anglo-Saxton Kingdom of East Anglia. When I first met King Offa, he was taken by my devout faith,sincerity, and virtues. He had no heirs and so he adopted me. Soon after, he died and I became king. Ã Ã Ã Ã Ã The people of my kingdom thought I was sent from God because of Christianity. They thought I had come to rescue His faithful people and save them from poverty and dispair. I was marked from the start to become king and destined for sainthood. Because I sailed by boat to my new kingdom, the people thought I had come from a mysterious land of myth. I was their hero and savior. My reign as king saw a massive invasion of the Vikings, which I fought valiantly. Ã Ã Ã Ã Ã The end was near, but I was not afraid. I beleived God was with me. My troops were defeated and I was taken prisioner by the Vikings, but I still did not lose my faith. Ã Ã Ã Ã Ã On November 20, 870, the Danish leader,Ingwar, ordered his men to tie me to a tree and torture me, to denounce my God and my faith. They first stripped me of my royality. Surrounded by several groups of cheering, ugly men, they shot at me with arrows, whipped, and clubbed me. I did not waiver, but became stronger in my beleif in God and salvation. I would make the ultimate sacrifice for my God, a sacrifice of love and life, and so I prayed. The Danes soon tired of my undying faith and courage,and beheaded me. My body was to be tossed into the underbrush to be forgotten, but my head they continued to abuse because I would not say the words they wanted to hear.
Monday, January 13, 2020
[pic] Diploma in Hospitality and Tourism HT 1020 Marketing in H&T The outlet of CarrefourÃ ® Lecturer: MR. Alvin Group name: 4+1 Group members: LI CHUNYAN |1111/9205 | |LIU FANGYU |1108/8812 | |HUANG JIAHUI |1112/9271 | |XU KE |1109/8920 | |YAO SHI |1201/9343 | Table of Contents 1. IntroductionÃ¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 2. BackgroundÃ¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦3 3. Marketing ResearchÃ¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 3 3. 1 Marketing ConceptÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦3 3. 2 Service MarketingÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. 4 3. 2. 1 EnvironmentÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦5 3. 2. 2 Service conceptÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 5 3. 2. 3 Quality of service managementÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 5 3. 2. 4 Four-dimensional customer serviceÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 6 3. 3 Micro & Macro Environment AssessmentÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 6 3. 4 Analyze Consumer Behavior Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦7 3. 4. Cultural FactorsÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 8 3. 4. 2 Social FactorsÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦8 3. 4. 3 Personal FactorsÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦8 3. 4. 4 Psychological FactorsÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 9 3. 5 Segmenting Consumer Markets.. Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. 9 4. NewsÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦10 4. 1 The Asia market territory is narrowingÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦10 4. 2 Suspected price fraudÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. 11 5. Recommended Strategy & Implementation PlanÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦.. 11 6. ConclusionÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã ¢â¬ ¦. 11 ReferenceÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦. 12 1. Introduction Our group has chosen CarrefourÃ ® for our project. In this report, firstly we will introduce its history briefly and then we will focus on 5 areas to analysis assessment and provide the detail that will enhance good marketing image/branding. The report will be conducted by analysis process, including situation analysis, identifying and explaining strategies, target customers needs and wants as well as the recommended implemented plans. 2. Background (History) The Carrefour Company was established by the Fournier and Defforey families in 1959.Over the past 40 years, the Carrefour group has grown to become the first largest retailer in Europe and the second largest retailer in the world, the group currently operates four main grocery store formats: hypermar kets, supermarkets, cash & carry and convenience stores. 3. Marketing research 3. 1 Marketing Concept Here are five key concepts under the Carrefour conduct their marketing activities. As we know, Production Concept is a concept where goods are produced without taking into consideration the choices or tastes of your customers. The Carrefour goods in the global procurement.A commodity into Carrefour, manufacturers must first obtain a recognized headquarters negotiations, each branch orders through the system. Carrefour has an international commodity department, responsible for looking for resources in the world, Commodity introduced to purchasing department, then he will ordering the goods . But, Product concept is the understanding of the dynamics of the product and showcase, the best qualities of the product. Carrefour is based on low prices, excellent customer service and a comfortable shopping environment for consumers to provide the required products of daily life.Carrefour limi ted and carefully select the types of goods , It will first consider the needs of customers ,From customers, employees, vendors, competitors obtain information to adjust the classification and respond to market trends, we need to understand the outside message, and then the reaction in the shop. For example, in 1994, Carrefour did not sell cosmetics, it selling computers in 1995 began selling cosmetics, computers. The Carrefour goods are usually priced lower than other markets .The Carrefour goods are usually priced lower than other markets, In 1987 ,Carrefour in Taiwan set off a sales promotion, reduce price lower than the normal market price of 20% to 50% , Carrefour through such sales way to make a profit . Carrefours through low-cost strategy, not only quickly occupied the market, and gradually establish a major feature of the full range. Sixties and seventies of the twentieth century, Carrefour launched Ã¢â¬Å"Vivez LibreÃ¢â¬ merchandise, free product is cheap unbranded prod ucts, the advertising slogan is: Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Ëfree product', no name, just as good, and cheaper. Within two weeks, 80 percent of consumers tried free products, 70% of consumers become repeat customers, This success is based on a basic concept of Carrefour, that customer philosophy. This is the marketing concept of Carrefour. Carrefour did not forget their social responsibility and is committed to safeguard the quality and safety of products, spare no effort to promote the Carrefour Quality System, and around the farmers in China to jointly develop green products and organic food, from product design, packaging and logistics the pursuit of environmentally friendly low-carbon.In addition, it balance to the Ã¢â¬ 3c model Ã¢â¬ 3. 2 Service Marketing The world economy nowadays is increasingly characterized as a service economy that Marketing services holds a unique place in business acumen and required different strategies to be successful. Services are characterized by being int angible, perishable, variable and inseparable from their provider. Marketing Services is not just about selling something, it is a true encounter . In fact, the growth of the service sector has long been considered as indicative of a countryÃ¢â¬â¢s economic progress.Economic history tells us that all developing nations have invariably experienced a shift from agriculture to industry and then to the service sector as the main stay of the economy . services now increasingly represent an integral part of the product and this interconnectedness of goods and services is represented on a goods-services continuum. 3. 2. 1 Services environment Carrefour supermarket have a warm feeling for consumer, it can increase sales. They offers holiday shopping channels, during the holiday season, customers can enjoy the convenience of shopping and fast.External environment provides parking, special offers the announcement district and have different partition; wine drinking area, recreation area, bu lk, grain and oil area, Hardware District. In each partition have the difference between all kinds of goods. The best-selling products usually put in the customer more easily to find it. If you can not find something, inside the supermarket staff will give you the greatest help. 3. 2. 2 Carrefour's service concept People-oriented . Carrefour attaches great importance to direct contact with the customer a line employee education and training .Because lower-level employees have the biggest impact on service perceptions. So that employees fully understand and comprehend enterprise service marketing's overall goals, enhance their customer service sense of responsibility and sincere love, and pay attention to cultivate their dealing with customers, and establish a good relationship with the customer. 3. 2. 3 CarrefourÃ¢â¬â¢s quality of service management. Quality service ensures that customers are satisfied with what they have paid for, and maintain the key to customer satisfaction is the level of product quality.For service companies provide intangible products, the evaluation of both the quality of their services include: customer service content beyond the basic services provided by the enterprise, also including the specific quality of the various services offered by the enterprise project. 3. 2. 4 Four-dimensional customer service Carrefour has four-dimensional customer service system that all the stores to install the Ã¢â¬Å"service satisfaction survey systemÃ¢â¬ , they can collect customer feedback as an important indicator of the stores appraisal to urge stores that continue to improve and optimize the services to improve the management level. . 3 Micro & Macro Environment Assessment The first time Carrefour created a new type of sales market, the hypermarket in 1963, the first time Carrefour set up the huge supermarket In French in the same year. The first time Carrefour entry international market in1969, for now have more than 10000 stores in 31 count ries and area, it is the NO. 39 top Fortune Global 500 in 2012.Although the Carrefour is powerful in the world, it also has the weaknesses; the online shop development of Carrefour is lacking behind as compare to competitors, market in some countries lack of management or expertise in this business. The way of Carrefour to development is at current markets possible to amplification at new aspect, or opens the stores in some countries that it didnÃ¢â¬â¢t open before, such as some third-world country, this action not only can set up the new market for Carrefour but also can increate the opportunities of the local.Absolutely, the Carrefour faces some threats; recent years there is a increase of competitors, thus causing a drop in market shares. Economy problem in Europe, has causes many forms of difficulty including revenues, costs and also trades. These are microenvironment of Carrefour. In the macro environment of Carrefour by using PEST to analysis the China market. ChinaÃ¢â¬â¢s membership in WTO has helped oversea investor to easily penetrate into the China market due to government standardizing its market laws and regulations to international standards.Having one of the world largest population, the open market to the world has boast ChinaÃ¢â¬â¢s economy thus causing increase of wealth in the population, increasing the amount of middle class consumers greatly attracts foreign investors like Carrefour; To enter the market or expand their market shares in China. Due to internationalization, China social and culture is more or less affected as they are more exposed to the world, they are becoming more and more westernize.Better wealth and social changes have also changes peoples buying behavior, consumers who have better income naturally believe that overseas products might be better than local ones. Such belief and buying behavior have causes brand and business from other country to target ChinaÃ¢â¬â¢s high spending market. Open market to the world als o leads to increase research and development in the country, as company and business coming in means that factory like assembly and production factories will start to move in too.Technology and expertise start to increase in China due to this flop of business vast development. Business like Carrefour who carries house brand will consider moving itÃ¢â¬â¢s factories of production to China due to low labor costs and also the improve of technology and expertise will minimize the difficulty of shifting of factory; thus fast improvement in technology and expertise encourages business to shift itÃ¢â¬â¢s production or assembly line factory to China. 3. 4 Analyze Consumer Behavior In recent years, Consumer makes many buying decisions everyday.When it comes to shopping, the first thing come to the shopper mind is supermarket. The supermarket and people's lives are closely interrelated. However, supermarket environment, service attitude, commodity classification create a lot of influence o n shoppers desire to shop. 3. 4. 1 Cultural Factors One of the main characteristics affecting consumer behavior is a Culture factor, which exert the broadest and deepest influence on consumer behavior. For Carrefour, the business scope includes daily provisions, clothing, household appliances and etc. They have all kinds of goods that one need.It is now introducing KFC in the shopping concept. FuNaiTe dry cleaning shop is another concept. It has more than 50 different brands available in the market. It is like a collection of store and leisure, catering and entertainment as one of the major integrated stores. They can completely satisfy the consumers Ã¢â¬Å"One-stop shoppingÃ¢â¬ daily life consumption demand. There are three values that Carrefour always adheres to. They are Committing, Caring and staying Positive. They respect the customer's shopping freedom and want as much customers as possible.For customers, employees and suppliers, they have to trust each other. 3. 4. 2 Socia l Factors A consumerÃ¢â¬â¢s behavior is influenced by social factors. The Carrefour group is also responsible for the society. Carrefour actively participate in China's public welfare undertakings and community activities, supporting and participating in Beijing's bid for the Olympic Games and Shanghai world expo bid, and with a variety of forms to the affected areas, hope school, welfare institutions urgently needed goods donated. All of these influences our consumers and let our life more colorful.So people like to go Carrefour for consumption. 3. 4. 3 Personal Factors A buyerÃ¢â¬â¢s decisions are also influenced by personal characteristics. The economic situation of buyer is very important in purchasing goods. For Carrefour, they are not only providing the consumer Variety and special commodity to choice, such as food, Personal care, home supplies, Style leisure and so on. But they also have many promotion activities. Let consumer feel the money that was spent is valued. Beca use of the Ã¢â¬Å"One-Stop ShoppingÃ¢â¬ concept, buyers managed to save time in shopping.Carrefour determined in expanding as many business lines as possible, so that customers can purchase a neat daily necessity catered to all the classes, which located in different level of consumption customers. Commodity classification allows buyers to easily find things they are looking for in the shortest period of time frame. 3. 4. 4 Psychological Factors Psychological factors also play a role in consumer behavior. For example the Carrefour make full use of light and off-price merchandise to create the whole store a better atmosphere. As if making the customer feels the urge to buy upon entering Carrefour. . 5 Segmenting Consumer Markets we can identify from 7 aspects to segmentation consumer market. The first aspect is the geographic segmentation. Geographic Segmentation is collecting and analyzing information according to the physical location of the customers or other data source. Carre four marketers use geographic segmentation because they know where to sell their products to increase advertising and sales effect. For example, there are different numbers of population among each province in China then Guangdong consists of highest population with 160,000,000 peoples.Therefore, Carrefour should put more attention in Guangdong as the geographic in Guangdong is stronger compare than other province. Secondly, demographic segmentation calls for dividing the market into groups based on variables like age, sex, income, family life cycle, religion, education etc. Carrefour has targeted their demographic segment on age groups to enhance the performance of the organization. By age group report, age group from 15 to 64 years old had the highest number of people.In short, Carrefour Company should focus more on age group from 15 to 64 years old by identify their needs and wants. In this age group from 0-14 years old, they are more demanding in toys, milk, nappies, baby foods and prams. Age group from 15-64 years old has a broader and variety needs such as fashion item, cosmetic, apparels and health care products. Age above 65 have less demand, they like to buy a newspaper. Next, gender segmentation calls for dividing a market into different groups based on sex. Men tend to be cigarette and wine, whereas women tend to cosmetics and clothes.Fourthly, Carrefour marketers focus on the age and life cycle segmentation including provision of different products or use different marketing method for different angles and life cycle group. Fifthly aspect is income segmentation. Since the present income gap still very big, low-income people could not afford some expensive things, such as diamond and gold. Next is psychographic segmentation. It calls for dividing a market into different groups based on social class, lifestyle, or personal characteristics. Finally aspect is behavioral segmentation.This group based on consumer knowledge, attitudes, uses, or responses to a product. Carrefour marketers believe that behavior variables are the best starting point for building market segments. 4. News 4. 1 The Asia market territory is narrowing. On July 5th of 2012, according to people familiar with the matter, Carrefour trapped in big shareholder pressure, they are considering selling its branch, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand, in order to raise $1 billion. Carrefour has been hiring Goldman group, UBS assist to asset auction. However, the plan is still in the primary stage. 4. 2 Suspected price fraudThis year ,on January 6, by the national development and reform commission disclosure suspected price fraud, using the original fiction to attract customers high settlement, not to perform price commitment, misleading price marking and so on the many kinds of fraud. For example, Shanghai Carrefour Nan Xiang shop sales bow and arrow spherical teapot, price tag labeling each 36. 80 Yuan, the actual settlement price 49. 00 Yuan each, Sales clove auspiciou s teapot, price tag labeling each 36. 90 Yuan, the actual settlement price 66 Yuan each. 5. Recommended Strategy & Implementation PlanThey should improve the quality of service of the employees, at the same time clearly the price supermarket products. That can not engage in fraud. Attention should be paid to the education and training of the front-line employees in direct contact with customers, so that they fully understand and appreciate the overall objectives of the enterprise services marketing, and enhance their sense of responsibility for customer service and a sincere love and attention to train them to deal with the customer, with the customer to establish good relations and other aspects of high-level skills. 6. ConclusionThrough the marketing research of Carrefour, We know that committed, caring and positive, these three values reflect the CarrefourÃ¢â¬â¢s culture. The Carrefour marketing concept is to low prices, excellent customer service and comfortable shopping envir onment for the vast number of consumers with daily life for all kinds of consumer goods. To customer commitment is in the price, product variety, quality, service and convenience and so on, various aspects meet the needs of the consumers. Carrefour as the greatest influence of first-class enterprise in the world, they also still exist some defects to be changed.In general, Carrefour provided the best service to customer and consumer everyday. Let everyone to enjoy better quality of life everyday. Reference list Carrefour. 2011. Current news. [online] Available at: http://www. carrefour. com/cdc/group/our-group/. [Accessed November 11 2011]. Anonymous , 2004 , Carrefour's mature PR . [online] China : Si Rui management . Available at: http://esoftbank. com. cn/wz/81_9503. html [Accessed November 12 2012] ZhaoQi. 2010. Carrefour difficulties and service mode change. China: WangHan, Wal-mart pattern Vs Carrefour mode.Gai Gai. 2012. Carrefour. [online] Available at: http://baike. baidu. com/view/18119. htm. [Accessed November 11 2012]. CongXiao,N. 2011. Carrefour price fraud event. [online] Available at: http://finance. people. com. cn/GB/8215/210272/234396/16257633. htm . [Accessed November 11 2012] Beckham, H. W 2008,Ã EBSCO Research Starters Ã¢â¬â Academic Topic Overviews : Competitive Strategy, EBSCO Publishing Inc. ,Ã Ã viewed 10 November 2012, Ebsco Host database. Porter, M. E 2008, The Five Competitive Forces that Shape Strategy. Harvard Business Review, p. 86-104.
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Sample details Pages: 25 Words: 7567 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Finance Essay Type Analytical essay Did you like this example? Dividend policy and the factors behind its determination are considered to be a widely tackled topic in the world of modern finance given the indefinite theories supporting its crucial impact on the firms value and hence arousing great controversy. Most of the research implemented tackled developed markets as opposed to emerging markets which are believed to add a lot to the debate that deeply roots to the seventies given the different nature and lack of efficiency that emerging markets possess and hence adds to the attractiveness of the debate. This paper will mainly cover the key determinates to the dividend policy and how these determinants impact its formation in the most tradable listed companies in the Egyptian stock market over a period of five years 2006-2011 in the first research done by the author. DonÃ¢â¬â¢t waste time! Our writers will create an original "An Analysis Of The Egyptian Stock Market Finance Essay" essay for you Create order This paper is structured as follows: Chapter 2 deals with literature review tapping on its theoretical and historical background. Chapter 3 deeply covers methodology, research question, objectives, and hypothesis analysis. Chapter 4 Data Analysis, Results and recommendations. Keywords: Dividend Policy, Dividend theories, Ownership Structure (Capital Structure), Cash Flow, leverage, Taxes, Sector, Profitability. Literature Review Theoretical background There are various researches and studies which examine a number of theories related to determinant of dividend policy. The main objectives of these theories and studies were to examine and find correlation between firm characteristics and dividend policy. Companies pays dividend when it has sufficient internal sources of funding, if companies reduce dividend payout the company owners may become worried about the company performance , since they consider it as a signal of company poor performance and low profits which leads to decline in stock price. According to the outcome model, dividends are paid because minority shareholders pressure corporate insiders to pay cash, while as per the Substitute model, insiders interested in issuing equity. In general, higher dividends payouts lead to lower Retained Earnings and Capital Gain and vice versa, leaving total wealth of shareholders unchanged. In certain countries, shareholders are taxed more heavily on dividends receipts th an on capital gain. Firms can signal future profitability through paying dividends. Firms that initiate dividends, experience share price increases, and vice versa. Recently an idea has been focused on, implementing that dividends policies address agency problems between corporate insiders and outside shareholders. This theory implies that unless profits are paid, it might be diverted by the insiders for personal use, or which may result in commitment to unprofitable projects with benefits to those insiders. Dividend Theoretical back ground. Agency Theory. Insiders, who control corporate assets, can use these assets for purposes that are detrimental to the interest of outside investors. They also can use corporate assets to pursue investment strategies that yield them personal benefits of control. Through dividends, insiders return corporate earnings to investors and wont be able to using such earnings to benefit themselves. This is because managers who possess cash would like to reinvest in projects that will yield them personal benefits Also paying dividends exposes companies to the possible need to come to the capital markets in the future to raise external funds. Paying dividends result in lesser cash flow available in the hands of insiders (managers), which mitigate their ability to spend on projects which benefit their own interest. Dividends could serve as a tool to reduce or eliminate agency cost, in addition companies will pay lower dividend when manager holds equity in the company. If mangers hold a position in the company equity it will defiantly affect the dividend policy. Chen Steiner (1999). , Al-Najjar and Hussainey2009. Agency cost might be reduced if insiders boost their share in the company by making the managers the eventual owners of company, yet this ultimate ownership by management will lead to a conflict of interest between the management and outsiders since the insiders will try to retain more cash under their management either by decreasing payment of dividends or by continuously paying out dividends at a at low level bearing in mind the tax consideration above in developed markets (Jensen and Meckling 1976). Directors manage the companies through a contract between the shareholders and managers, in which the mangers have power and authority to manage the company in order to maximize shareholders wealth in return of a specific benefit. Jensen and Meckling (1976). If inside managers increase their common stock-ownership in the company, they will be keen on aligning th eir interest with shareholders interests; this will result in reducing equity agency cost. The higher common stocks held by managers, the more likely such owner-managers act in the interests of Shareholders and work on optimizing the companys value. Thus, a higher level of insider ownership will lead to lower agency problems and reduces the role of dividends as a monitoring tool to control for agency cost Controlling shareholders can effectively determine the decisions of the managers, and can implement policies that benefit themselves at the expense of the minority shareholders The main target of Corporate Governance is mainly reaching a compromise between the company management and the shareholders,( Jiraporn et al. (2008). If the company has a strong a well-established corporate governance regulations investors will be paid high dividend, both are positively correlated .Michaely and Roberts (2006) . Kowalewski et al. (2007). Companies with qualified and quality corporate governance team are more capable of controlling Agency cost and reducing them, thus paying more and higher dividends. Investors would prefer to maintain the companys debt ratio to the lowest level possible, out of belief that it will results in more dividends to them and thus it will reduce cash available to managers (Jensen 2009a , Meckling 1976). Also paying dividends exposes companies to the possible need to come to the capital markets in the future to raise external funds. Since payment of dividends prevents management from continuing to invest in bad projects, we should expect earnings and profitability to increase. However if the board decides on dividends, before management has a chance to overinvest, then it is difficult to predict and assess how future earnings will be relative and compared to past earnings Paying dividends result in lesser cash flow available in the hands of insiders (managers), which mitigate their ability to spend on projects which ben efit their own interest. If inside managers increase their common stock-ownership in the company, they will be keen on aligning their interest with shareholders interests; this will result in reducing equity agency cost. The higher common stocks held by managers, the more likely such owner-managers act in the interests of Shareholders and work on optimizing the companys value. Thus, a higher level of insider ownership will lead to lower agency problems and reduces the role of dividends as a monitoring tool to control for agency cost. Shareholders can utilize their legal powers in voting for Directors who offer better dividends policies, or by suing companies that spend too lavishly on activities that benefit only insiders. Good investor protection makes asset diversion legally riskier and more expensive for insiders. The greater the rights of the minority shareholders, the more the cash they can extract form the firm, other things equal. In the high protection countries shareh olders are able to extract dividends from companies by their ability to resist oppression rather than having any specific dividends rights. Generally, Shareholders, who feel protected, would accept low dividends, and high The investment policy of the firm cannot be taken as independent of its dividends policy, thus paying dividends may reduce the inefficiency of marginal investment. Also the allocation of profits to shareholders on pro rata basis cannot be taken for granted Firms in common law countries, where investors protection is better, make higher dividends than firm in civil law countries. Also, in common law countries, high growth firms make lower dividends than low growth countries.- Corporate and other laws grant outside investors, including shareholders, certain powers to protect their investment against expropriation by insiders. Power such as equality in receiving the same per share dividends as insiders, to the power to vote on important corporate matters. Common law countries appear to have better legal protection of minority shareholders, than civil law countries. Such better protection contributes to the efficiency of resource allocation and to economic growth. Reinvestment rates, from a company with good opportunities, as they know that when these investments pay off, they could extract high dividends. In contrast, if protection is poor, shareholders will try to get what they can. A firm must establish a reputation for moderation in expropriating shareholders, in order to have the chance and competences to raise funds from external resources at low cost and approach capital markets for funds. In countries with stronger shareholder protection, the need for reputational mechanism is weaker, and hence the need to pay dividends. Other things equal, dividends payout ratios should be higher in countries with weak legal protection than in those with strong protection. Firms with better growth prospects have a stronger incentive to establish a reputation. As they have need to raise fund from external resources. Thus firms with better growth prospects may choose higher dividends payout ratios than firms with poor growth prospects. The relationship between growth prospects and dividend payout is ambiguous, as in contrast to the above; firms with good growth prospects have a better use of funds than the ones with poor growth. In common law countries, payout ratios are strictly higher for slowly growing firms than rapidly growing ones. Results are consistent with the predications of the outcome of the Agency model, according to which well protected minority investors are happy with low dividend payout firms with good growth prospects In Civil law countries, in contrast, rapidly growing firms appear to pay higher dividends. On all measures of dividends payouts, countries with better shareholder protection have higher dividends payout ratios than do countries with worse protection. Within countries with good shareholder protection, high growth firms have lower dividends payout than low growth firms. Within countries with low shareholder protection, high growth firms have higher dividends payout than low growth firms. Agency approach is highly relevant to an understanding of corporate dividends policies. Signaling theory Firms with high future earnings and rewards would prefer announcing and signaling that to investors and outside parties in the market, while firms with low cash flow expectation will not declare or be able to do the same, as managers are not supposed to send wrong signals to the market. Investors can assume information about firms future earnings through the signal coming from dividend announcements, both in terms of the stability of, and changes in, dividends. The signaling hypothesis argues that special dividends provide a signal to investors of the firms improving potential earnings; Signaling theory could be tested through the company future increase in earnings.( Watts (1973).) Managers use special dividends to signal future operating performance for firms with high growth opportunities, and use special dividends to reduce agency costs for firms with low growth opportunities. The market reacts more strongly to the disbursement of excess cash flow by firms with low gro wth opportunities than it does to the announcement of a special dividend as a signal by firms with high growth opportunities. Also, the market reacts moderately to the special dividend announcement of a firm with higher growth opportunities and higher preannouncement cash flow, whereas the reaction is insignificant for firms with higher growth. Usually the stock market reacts positively to dividend announcement, when companies announce paying dividends the stock price moves up, we can say that there is a positive relation. Stock price react positively to any increase or special dividends, which enhance the signaling hypothesis, also it serve as an evident to the fact that mangers will be willing to pay dividend if they have faith in the company future earnings that it will steadily increase and grow, dividend also serve as a signal to future cash flow of the company, which reflect stability in future earning and positive cash flow vis versa. Lintner(1956). Lipson Maquieira and Megginson (1998) ( Kale Noe (1990). As managers are likely to have more information about the firms future prospects than outside investors, they may be able to use changes in dividends as a vehicle to communicate information to the financial market about a firms future earnings and growth. Outside Investors may perceive dividends as a reflection of the managers assessment of a firms performance and prospects. However, managers should possess private information about the firms prospects, and have incentives to convey such information to the market. Based on that, a signal should be true, that is, a firm with poor future prospects should not send false signals to the market by increasing dividends payments. Thus the market should be able to rely on the signal to differentiate among firms. If these conditions are fulfilled, the market should be able to react favorably to the announcements of dividends increase and unfavorably otherwise. (Al-Najjar and Hussainey 2009b). Div idend payout is an indication of the company historical healthy performance however future earnings could be negative, which means that company current positive performance could not be an indication of future performance. We can notice companies paying good dividends and in the coming years it could be in a financial squeeze and are not able to pay any dividend. (Benartzi et al. 1997). Companies with strong corporate governance will prefer to announce low dividend payout, in case there is potential future investment opportunities, on the contrary companies with poor corporate governance will prefer to announce high dividend payout since it acts as a signal that the company management is doing a good job for the shareholder interest. (.Aharony and Swary, 1980 ) . Pecking order Theory Companies will initially seek Retained Earnings to finance announced dividends, and then seek debt to borrow, if Retained Earnings are insufficient, instead of issuing new shares. Companies usually prefer internal funding on external one .Mayers (1984), and Myers and Majluf (1984). Financing comes from three sources: internal funds, debt and new equity, Companies prioritize their sources of income, first priority to Internal Financing, debt, and then finally raising of equity is the last resort. Raising capital through equity is not usually preferred means; since shareholders sometimes thought that managers believes that the company is overvalued they are trying to benefit from this mispricing, at that point investor will not be willing to place high value for the new issue. The issue of equity would signal lack of confidence in the board and that the stock price is overvalued. Thus such issue can lead to a drop in share price if stock price is overvalued, the issue of equity would be favored. Myers (1984) From the point of view of an outside Investor, Equity is more risky than outside Debt, as it will demand higher rate of return on Equity than on Debt, however from the prospective of those inside the company, Retained Earnings are better source of income than Debt, and debt is a better deal than equity finance. This theory maintains that business usually adhere to a certain hierarchy of financing sources and prefer internal financing, if available, and then will prefer debt over equity for external financing. New Equity means issuing shares, which results in bringing external ownership into the company. The issue of debt signals the boards confidence and trust that an investment is profitable and that the current stock price is undervalued. The companies will adhere to pecking order theory to finance its operations (Al-Najjar Hussauney, 2009b). As equity markets become larger and more liquid, dependence on marginal debt financing drops sig nificantly. In the presence of both debt and equity markets, the relative importance of debt (as captured by aggregate debt to equity ratio) appears to fall as economies grow. Transaction cost Theory Companies that enjoy low transaction costs of equity or debt issuance may be more willing to pay dividends than firms that have high transaction costs. A company will be willing to pay dividends when its internally generated funds are not completely utilized for investment purposes, and when it experiences low growth. Rozeff (1982). Larger companies possess the privilege of smaller transaction (issuing cost) because of economies of Scale. Companies size plays an important role in the dividend pay-out ratio. Larger companies have easier access to the capital market, which reduces their dependence on internally generated funding and allows for higher pay-out ratios Companies that have a low transaction cost of equity or debt issuance may be more willing to distribute cash dividends more than companies with high transaction cost. Firms that have low transaction costs of equity or debt issuance may be more inclined to distribute cash dividends than firms that have high transac tion costs. The more paid dividends the lower will be the agency cost incurred. However, the more paid dividends will lead to an increase in the transaction cost. If Shareholders seek a steady flow of income from their capital investment, then dividend payments would be the cheapest way to achieve such goal. The companies size will be an important determinant of the dividend policy, since the small companies would mainly rely on debts to finance their activities and payment of dividends, thus such small companies will face higher transactions cost than larger ones. If dividend payments will minimize transaction costs shareholders, then positive dividends payout would be optimal. There is an argument that, despite the fact that Transactions cost has dramatically been reduced, such reduction should have resulted in lower demand in dividends, as the alternative options have been reduced, but there is no apparent evidence of a shift or reduction in dividends payment which is related to such change in transaction cost. Such argument specifically applies to small investors who do not hold many shares, thus the cost of transaction will be higher. Bird in hand Theory The bird-in-the-hand may sound familiar as it is taken from an old saying: a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. In this theory the bird in the hand is referring to dividends and the bush is referring to capital gains. Dividend, as a general rule, increase firms value, Shareholders have preference for cash than future capital gain on which stocks to build a position in. Thus a divided payment is associated with increasing firms value investors prefer higher dividend which reduces uncertainty about future cash flows. A high payout ratio will reduce the cost of capital and thus increase share value (Gordon and Lintner, 1962). If company will increase its dividend payout ratio, shareholders became concerned about the firm future capital gain, since the retained earning will be negatively affect , this also could hinders management from potential future investment opportunities which could increase in future earnings One of the leading theories back then was the bird in hand theory and explicitly stating that investors prefer dividends as opposed to retained earnings as they viewed dividends to offer more certainty than retained earning which came second in terms of certainty and inevitability Current dividends are relatively more certain than future capital returns. Shareholders are risk averse and prefer to receive dividends in the present than to future capital gains (Gordon, 1962, Miller and Modiglianis 1961). Shareholders are not entitled to fixed returns. Current dividends are relatively more certain than future capital returns. Shareholders are risk averse and prefer to receive dividends in the present than to future capital gains. Investors values each dollar paid as a dividend four times as opposed to each dollar kept on as retained earnings; also it has greater and more positive effect on share performance. (Diamond, 1967 ). Literature Review. Share price and perfect market. Dividend policy has been a fertile topic of discussion since Miller and Modigliani (1961) imposed that dividends are irrelevant and have hardly any influence on a firms share price in the event of having a perfect capital market, a matter that has created great debate. Opposing practitioners to the Miller and Modiglianis theory declined this preposition by stating that a perfect capital market assumption does not exist and introduced competing theories and research to provide pragmatic evidence that dividends matter most in imperfect capital markets which are the case in real world and hence dividends do have an impact on a firms share price. Baker and Wurgler (2004) companies are willing to initiate dividend when the stock prices react positively when deciding initiating dividend. When the market positively reacts with initiating dividend and adds premium to the stocks value. Fama and French (2001), Grullon, Michaely, and Swaminathan (2002), and DeAngelo, DeAngelo, and St ulz (2006)). Explains the life cycle theory for dividend payment, which shows that companies with high retained earnings compared to its total asset will be willing to initiate dividend Taxes. Sighting this debate from a tax preference angle we shall dig deep in the 1970s and 1980s where several research suggested that dividends are more disposed to higher tax cut than capital gains. (Brennan, 1970; Elton and Gruber, 1970; Litzenberger and Ramaswamy, 1979; Litzenberger and Ramaswamy, 1982; Kalay, 1982; John and Williams, 1985; Poterba and Summers, 1984; Miller and Rock, 1985; Ambarish et al., 1987) and that dividends are taxed directly but capital gains will be taxed/realized only when the stocks are sold and hence investors are more prone to keep a companys profit as opposed to distributing a cash dividend for tax related concerns. The benefit behind the tax treatment in capital gains may lead investors to prefer a low dividend payout. However this does not apply to Egypt as of yet since there is no tax charged on neither dividends nor capital gains. But this matter has been proposed for implication especially amid the January 25th revolution a matter that abolish ed economic stability with the government it brought down leading to an increase in the balance of payment deficit. Despite the turbulence arousing, all successive governments who normally disagree on one view came to unite in solving this problem by suggesting the imposition of taxes to both dividends and capital gains in attempts to increase its financial resources. Ownership structure. Among other determinants is the ownership structure where a correlation between ownership structure and dividend performance existed which is normally referred to the Agency problem in (Easterbrook, 1984; Jensen, 1986), which imposes that idea that dividends provide an indirect means of control to the management of a firm. Jensen and Meckling (1976) focused on the issue of Agency Cost Hypothesis and stated that dividend limits the cash under insiders management, therefore leaving them under tough capital market analysis. Jensen and Meckling (1976) argued that agency cost might be reduced if insiders increase their ownership in the firm by making the managers the eventual owners of company yet this ultimate ownership by management will lead to a conflict of interest between the management and outsiders since the insiders will make efforts to collect more cash under their management either by reducing payment of dividends or by continuously paying out dividends at a at low level bear ing in mind the tax consideration above in developed markets. Glen et al. (1995), Gul (1999a), Naser et al. (2004) and Al-Malkawi (2007) point out that in government ownership in emerging markets is major element of the dividend decision-making process. Gul (1999a) proposed a positive relationship between government ownership and dividends, debating that firms with high Government ownership face less hurdles in financing investment projects, and accordingly can afford to pay more dividends. On the contrary, firms with limited or no government ownership face difficulties in raising money, and instead rely on retained earnings for investments by paying small dividends. Legal Protection Text Glen et al. (1995) stated that shareholders in countries with poor legal protection need to be protected. Governments are normally heavy weighted investors and accordingly they should defend minority investors through observing the directors and forcing them to expel cash. Naser et al. (2004) added that in emerging market, there is a poor legal protection for investors; governments plays important role in order to build up a solid firm reputation where there is no abuse of minority shareholders by paying out large dividends. They further stressed building this reputation has substantial on emerging exchanges where the minority shareholders are suffering. Al-Malkawi (2007) communicated that the government plays an important role on behalf of its citizen who do not manage firm. The government was found to be the most the most powerful in influencing the dividend policy especially among large shareholders in firms listed on the Amman Stock Exchange. Accordingly in firms like the one discussed above a conflict might exist that is normally referred to as a double principal-agent conflict. This conflict may happen between citizens and government representatives or managers and government representatives in case the former does not act in the latters best interest. This problem could be solved through the payout of a larger dividend value which shrinks the cash flow available to managers and accordingly minimizing the agency problems of the firm. This explanation concurs with the study carried by Gugler (2003) who examined the dividend policies in Australian firms. Wrapping up the above there is a clear positive correlation between the dividend payout and the government ownership where the percent of shares owned by the government can be an indicator to the companys ownership structure. Free cash Flow. The percent of shares held by various types of shareholders is not being the only determinant of the dividend-agency framework; the free cash flow may also be of great significance. Jensen (1986) defined free cash flow as the cash flow in surplus of the funds essential for all projects with a positive net present value (NPV). He proved that as the increase in free cash flow escalates the agency conflict between the interests between the management and outside shareholders leading to a decrease in the performance of the company. While shareholders require their managers to maximize the value of their shares, the managers may have a conflicting interest and prefer to derive benefits for themselves. Jensens free cash flow hypothesis has been reinforced by studies by Jensen et al. (1992) and Smith and Watts (1992). La Porta et al. (2000) added that when a firm has a free cash flow, its managers will engage in extravagant practices. Various studies have argues that firms with a greater free cash flow need to pay more dividends to lower the agency costs of the free cash flow (Jensen, 1986; Holder et al., 1998; La Porta et al., 2000; and Mollah et al., 2002). Based on the above studies there is a positive relationship between the free cash flow and the dividend payout ratio and hence the dividend payout is positively associated with free cash flow. The Free Cash Flow Hypothesis (imposed by Jensen 1986) stipulated that companies normally focus on finding opportunities in new project to generate income profitability where the focus on dividend payout is less prior and is normally financed off the residual balance. Given this debate, the concept of complete separation between ownership and management is the most alluring to avoid conflict of interest between both parties. A study by Afza and Slahudin, 2009 concluded that the more profitable investment opportunities the less efficiency in the use of cash resources by management. the firms financial competence and liquidity position are considered key determinants of the dividend value. Companies facing liquidity squeeze will be more prone to pay out a stock dividend versus a cash dividend since paying stock dividends will not burden the companys liquidity status. Paying dividends in the form of stocks will lead to the company to increase its number of outstanding shares which directly hits the shareholders value and hence forces the company to strive more to increase its profit by at least the same percentages of increase in its shares to avoid dilution of its EPS. Company Size. The size of a firm plays an integral role on the level of financial constraint the firm is facing and accordingly is considered a key factor in determining the dividend amount paid out by such company. The bigger the firms size the higher value of their assets and hence it is easier for them to obtain funds through external capital markets whether by debt or equity. Large size firms also do not lower the amount the pay out as dividend to finance future profitable projects they are normally able to do both unless in its extremely inevitable for them. Small firms on the contrary, have restricted access to external debt or equity markets try to increase the amount of funds generated internally by growing their retention ratio which lowers the dividend payout ratio in an attempt to increase cash in hand to finance its new projects. Eddy and Seifert (1988), Jensen et al. (1992), Redding (1997), and Fama and French (2000) indicated that large firms allocate a higher amount of their net profits as dividends as opposed to small firms. Numerous studies have verified the influence of firm size on the dividend-agency association. Lloyd et al. (1985) were among the leaders to adjust Rozeffs model by adding firm size as an supplementary variable. They considered it an important descriptive constituent, as large companies are more likely to increase their dividend payouts to lower their agency costs. Their adjustment to the Rozeff model actually supports Jensen and Mecklings (1976) debate that stated that agency costs are connected with firm size. They supported the idea that for large firms the ownership structure has a bargaining control which hence increases agency costs. Adding to this, Sawicki (2005) demonstrated that dividend payments can help to indirectly monitor managers performance in large firms. In large firms, information irregularity surges due to ownership dispersal, shrinking the shareholders capability to control the internal and exter nal activities of the firm. This result in a decreased inefficient control by the management where paying out a large dividend value can be a solution to this problem since it escalates the need for external financing which accordingly leads to more control on these firms from external creditors. Holder et al. (1998) communicated illustrated in a study that a positive relation exists between dividends, firm sizes and transaction costs. The study revealed that larger firms have better access to capital markets and accordingly have easier access to raise funds at low costs which allows a payout of higher dividends. Leverage. The firms capital structure and leverage also affect its dividend decisions. A study by Darling (1957) debated that highly leveraged companies need more cash and liquidity to meet its future payment obligations. Also high leveraged company are normally threaten by liquidity shortage and accordingly are subject to insolvency due to the extended burden on the companys liquidity position and the non-payment of interest which normally reduces the companys cash flows available for dividend payments making having high debt ratio companies pay low dividends (Rozef, 1982) Profitability. On the other hand, companies profitability is an important measure of dividend payout determinant. Lintner (1956) found that companies net profits are important determinant of dividend change and De Angelo Et. Al (1992) claimed that current profit is a critical determinant of dividend decision. This is why managers are unwilling to lower dividend payout ratios unless when earnings are very low; also the more profits generated by a company the more dividends it pays out. Mayers and Frank, 2008 Fama and French (200). In line with Fama and French (2001), we concluded that companies who pays dividend always profitable large companies, on the other hand this relation is not always the case across different countries it could be different. The fact that the ownership of firms isnt diversified or slashed into small group creates the burden of financial tunneling as major shareholders strive to work for the benefit of their big stakes which normally conflicts with the benefit of the firm and smaller shareholders exploiting the financial capabilities for their interest. Research Gap. From the previous studies we found that there isnt any study that analyze or examine determinates of dividend policy of the Egyptian listed companies. Methodology In the last chapter I find that there is a research gap, since there isnt any studies which examine or analyze the determinates of dividend policy of the Egyptian listed companies (most active) Research Questions Accordingly, we can say that our research question is what are the main determinates of dividend policy for the Egyptian listed stocks EGX 100) Research Objectives 3.2.1. Determining theoretical back ground of dividend policy. 3.2.2. Determining the historical back ground of dividend policy. 3.2.3. Scanning literature review regarding determinants of dividend policy 3.2.4. Discover main determinants of dividend policy. 3.2.5. Studying the effect of each determinates of dividend policy. 3.2.6. Studying the relative importance of each determinates of dividend policy. 3.2.7. Directing the other researchers towards the future researched dividend policy. 3.2.8. Studying the effect of each determinates of dividend policy. 3.2.9. Studying the effect of each determinates of dividend policy. Research Model Profitability Leverage Ownership structure Free Cash flow Control Variables Industry. Size Determinants (Independent) Cash Dividend. Dividends (Dependent) Stock Dividend. The Independent Variables: Size: continuous quantitative variable Leverage: Continuous quantitative variable ranges from 0 to 1. Cash flow : Continuous quantitative Variable Profitability: Continuous quantitative variable ranges from 0 to 1. The Industry : Nominal variable contains 29 industry The Ownership Structure: Binary Variables contains 2 categories 0 for the companies which is More than 50% of ownership is Anchor or institutional, and 1 for the companies which is More than 50% of ownership is Retail. The Dependent variables: The cash Dividend. : a continuous variable The Stock Dividend. Binary variable contains 2 categories 0 no stock dividends and 1 yes. Hypotheses 3.4.1. There is a positive relation between the company size dividends paid. 3.4.2. There is a positive relation between the company profitability dividend paid. 3.4.3. There is a negative relation between intuitional ownership dividend paid. 3.4.4. There is a positive relation between retail ownership dividend paid. 3.4.5. There is a positive relation between the company free cash flow and divided paid 3.4.6. There is a negative relation between the company leverage and dividend paid 3.4.7. There is a positive relation between the company size and dividend paid Population and sample In this research paper we gathered data for the most active listed companies, about 100 companies included in the EGX 100ondex. Data Collection Our sample is prepared using data gathered from Bloomberg Mubasher; the sample includes all firms included in the EGX 100 .Bloomberg offers information on total assets, ROE, ROA, Free Cash flow, Leverage, ownership structure for years 2006 till 2011. Research limitation Though this paper was cautiously prepared, I believe that there are some limitations. The number of Egyptian listed stocks is limited. Companies do not report its financials in unified shape Lack of companys historical financials since Egypt is considered as emerging market. Lack of data sources. During the last 5 years a lot of profitable companies were bought by anchor or institutional investors which limits and change the number of active and profitable companies in the study. Data Analysis, Results and recommendations In this section of the research we will examine the hypothesis. As stated previously, this paper used historical data for the stocks include in the EGX 100 and special statistical techniques (multiple-regression) to study the correlation between variables in addition examine hypotheses Descriptive Statistics Table: Descriptive Statistics of The Variables Included in the investigation: N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Size (in what Unit for ex millions) 479 3.8795 94952 6060 14136 LEVERAGE % 376 .0001 735 59.5 91.3 Cash Flow (in what Unit for ex millions) 463 -363 113.80 -2.497 33.9891 Profitability % 427 -127.33 161.9773 16.051 19.789 Cash Dividend (in what Unit for ex millions) 588 .000 310.480 1.07201 12.8896 The means of SIZE, LEVERAGE, CASH FLOW, and CASH DIVIDENDS are 6060, -2.479, 16.051, and 1.07201 respectively. These variables have high variability as measured by standard deviations of 14136, 91.3, 33.99, and 12.89, respectively. But, the mean of the PROPFITABILITY is 16.051, and has low variability, as measured by a standard deviation of 19.789.These higher degrees of variability indicate that there are large differences among companies. Table: Frequency Table f or Stock Dividend variable: Frequency Percent Valid No 508 86.4 Yes 80 13.6 Total 588 100.0 86.4% of the companies dont give stock dividends while only 13.6% do. Table: Frequency Table for ownership variable: Frequency Percent Valid 50% Retail 348 59.2 = 50% Retail 240 40.8 Total 588 100.0 40.8% of the companies with more than 50% Retail ownership while 60% of the companies with more than 50% Anchor or institutional ownership. Table: Frequency Table for industry variable: Industry Frequency Percent Valid Percent Valid 1 42 7.1 7.1 2 30 5.1 5.1 3 18 3.1 3.1 4 30 5.1 5.1 5 138 23.5 23.5 6 54 9.2 9.2 7 12 2.0 2.0 8 6 1.0 1.0 9 6 1.0 1.0 11 6 1.0 1.0 12 30 5.1 5.1 13 12 2.0 2.0 14 30 5.1 5.1 15 12 2.0 2.0 16 18 3.1 3.1 17 12 2.0 2.0 18 24 4.1 4.1 19 36 6.1 6.1 20 6 1.0 1.0 21 6 1.0 1.0 22 6 1.0 1.0 23 6 1.0 1.0 24 6 1.0 1.0 25 6 1.0 1.0 26 6 1.0 1.0 27 6 1.0 1.0 28 12 2.0 2.0 29 6 1.0 1.0 30 6 1.0 1.0 Total 588 100.0 100.0 Correlation First Studding the effect of The Independent Variables on the Cash Dividends: Table: Pearson Coefficient Correlation Matrix: Profitability Cash Flow LEVERAGE Size Cash Dividend Profitability Pearson Correlation 1 .129** .043 .199** .026 Sig. (2-tailed) .009 .422 .000 .586 N 427 407 344 427 427 Cash Flow Pearson Correlation .129** 1 .049 -.097* .014 Sig. (2-tailed) .009 .365 .040 .758 N 407 463 350 443 463 LEVERAGE Pearson Correlation .043 .049 1 .104* .018 Sig. (2-tailed) .422 .365 .043 .732 N 344 350 376 376 376 Size Pearson Correlation .199** -.097* .104* 1 .147** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .040 .043 .001 N 427 443 376 479 479 Cash Dividend Pearson Correlation .026 .014 .018 .147** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .586 .758 .732 .001 N 427 463 376 479 588 Cash Dividend Vs Profitability: Sinc e P-value =0.586 which is greater than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 so we dont reject Ho: ÃÆ'Ã ÃâÃ =0 i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant relationship between Cash Dividend Profitability i.e. they are independent. Cash Dividend Vs Cash flow: Since P-value =0.758 which is greater than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 so we dont reject Ho: ÃÆ'Ã ÃâÃ =0 i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant relationship between Cash Dividend Cash flow i.e. they are independent. Cash Dividend Vs leverage: Since P-value =0.732 which is greater than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 so we dont reject Ho: ÃÆ'Ã ÃâÃ =0 i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant relationship between Cash Dividend Leverage i.e. they are independent. Cash Dividend Vs Size: Since P-value =0.001 which is less than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 so we reject Ho: ÃÆ'Ã ÃâÃ =0 i.e. we are 95% confident that there is significant linear weak relationship between Cash Dividend Size with ÃÆ'Ã ÃâÃ =0.147 Table : Eta measure for association between Cash Dividend and Industry: Value Nominal by Interval Eta Cash Dividend Dependent .082 Industry Dependent .593 Using Eta Measure it seems there a weak relationship between Cash Dividend and Industry. Table : Cramers V measure for association between Cash Dividend and Industry: Value Approx. Sig. Cramers V .572 .000 Since P-value 0.0005, we reject Ho: Independence I.e. there is an intermediate relationship between Industry and Cash Dividend. From The above Tables we deduce that 2 variables only would be used in the regression model: The Size of the Company. The Industry. To be used in the regression, The Variable of Industry would be reco ded into New 29 variable to have a binary variable represent each sector with value 1 if the company belongs to that sector and 0 otherwise. Regression The Variables Entered to the model: Model Variables Entered 1 Size Table : Goodness of fit Model Adjusted R Square 1 .020 This Model Explains 2% of the variations in Cash dividend variable, i.e its a poor fit model. Table : The Significance of The model: Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F 1 Regression 2112.156 1 2112.156 10.575 Residual 95272.863 477 199.733 Total 97385.019 478 a. Predictors: (Constant), Size b. Dependent Variable: Cash Dividend Since p-value = 0.001 which is less than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 we are 95 % confident that the model is significant. Table : the Significance of the Coefficients: Beta 1 (Constant) .402 Size .147 Since the p-value of the constant Coefficient ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ²o equals 0.568 i.e. More than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 Then we dont reject Ho: ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ²o=0 Since the p-value of the constant Coefficient ÃÆ'Ã ½Ãâ Ã ²1 equals 0.001 i.e. less than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 Then we reject Ho: ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ²1=0 I.e. when the size of the company increases by one unit the cash Dividend would increase by 0.147 units. Table : The Excluded Variables From the model: Model Beta In t Sig. Partial Correlation Co linearity Statistics Tolerance 1 Ownership structure -.047a -1.034 .302 -.047 .995 sec2 -.003a -.073 .942 -.003 .995 sec3 -.006a -.126 .900 -.006 .997 sec4 .008a .174 .862 .008 .994 sec5 .077a 1.714 .087 .078 .999 sec6 .014a .307 .759 .014 .986 sec7 .005a .104 .917 .005 .999 sec8 -.002a -.037 .970 -.002 .999 sec9 -.003a -.070 .944 -.003 .999 sec11 -.008a -.186 .852 -.009 1.000 sec12 -.095a -1.899 .058 -.087 .819 sec13 -.002a -.045 .964 -.002 .996 sec14 -.023a -.498 .619 -.023 .997 sec15 -.006a -.143 .886 -.007 .998 sec16 -.011a -.244 .807 -.011 .999 sec17 -.004a -.087 .931 -.004 .997 sec18 -.033a -.670 .503 -.031 .851 sec19 -.003a -.058 .954 -.003 .991 sec20 -.018a -.403 .687 -.018 .991 sec21 -.008a -.168 .867 -.008 1.000 sec22 .004a .093 .926 .004 .998 sec23 -.003a -.057 .955 -.003 .998 sec24 -.006a -.133 .894 -.006 .999 sec25 .003a .076 .940 .003 .998 sec26 .004a .090 .929 .004 1.000 sec27 -.002a -.050 .960 -.002 .999 sec28 -.004a -.083 .934 -.004 .997 sec29 -.003a -.065 .949 -.003 .998 sec30 -.002a -.033 .973 -.002 .998 Since P-value of All the variables in the above table is more than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±= 0.05 So all t he coefficients are insignificant so all this variable have no significant effect on the Cash dividend so they are excluded from the model b. Dependent Variable: Cash Dividend The prediction Model: (Expected Cash Dividends)= (0.147) (Size) SECOND: Studding the Effect of The independent variables on the Stock Dividend: Table : Comparing Means of Profitability between Companies give Stock Dividends and Companies dont: Levenes Test for Equality of Variances F Sig. Profitability Equal variances assumed 4.040 .045 Equal variances not assumed Since P-value of Levenes test =0.045 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho i.e. we assume equal variances Since P-value =0.797 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho: My=Mn i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant difference in profitability between The Companies that give Stock Dividends and the Companies that dont give on average. I.e. profitability and stock dividend are independent. Table : Comparing Means of leverage between Companies give Stock Dividends and Companies dont: Levenes Test for Equality of Variances F Sig. LEVERAGE Equal variances assumed 1.321 .251 Equal variances not assumed Since P-value of Levenes test =0.251 which i s ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho i.e. we assume equal variances Since P-value =0.322 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho: My=Mn i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant difference in leverage between The Companies that give Stock Dividends and the Companies that dont give on average. I.e. leverage and stock dividend are independent. Table : Comparing Means of Cash flows between Companies give Stock Dividends and Companies dont: Levenes Test for Equality of Variances F Sig. Cash Flow Equal variances assumed .282 .596 Equal variances not assumed Since P-value of Levenes test = 0.596 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho i.e. we assume equal variances Since P-value =0.759 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho: My=Mn i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant difference in Cash flows between The Companies that give Stock Div idends and the Companies that dont give on average. I.e. Cash flows and stock dividend are independent. Table : Comparing Means of Size between Companies give Stock Dividends and Companies dont: Levenes Test for Equality of Variances F Sig. Size Equal variances assumed 4.249 .040 Equal variances not assumed Since P-value of Levenes test = 0.04 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho i.e. we assume equal variances Since P-value =0.224 which is ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±/2 =0.025 then we dont reject Ho: My=Mn i.e. we are 95% confident that there is no significant difference in Size between The Companies that give Stock Dividends and the Companies that dont give on average. I.e. Size and stock dividend are independent. Table : Measuring the association between Industry and Stock Dividend: Value Approx. Sig. Uncertainty Coefficient Symmetric .023 .024 stock dividend Dependent .095 .024 Industry Dep endent .013 .024 With Stock Dividend dependent. Since P-value = 0.024 which is less than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 we reject Ho: independence we are 95% confident that Industry and STOCK DIVIDENDS are associated Table : Measuring the association between Ownership structure and Stock Dividend: Value Approx. Sig. Ordinal by Ordinal Gamma .040 .743 Since P-value = 0.743 which is less than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 we dont reject Ho: independence we are 95% confident that build and .private are independent. From the above tables we assume that all the variables cant be included in the logistic regression model except for Industry. The LogisticÃâÃ Regression: Table : the dependent Variable: Original Value Internal Value no 0 yes 1 The Variable of Industry would be recoded into New 28 variable with base category sector 1 to have a binary variable represent each sector with value 1 if the company belongs to that sector and 0 otherwise. Table: Variables Excluded from the Model: Variables not in the Equation Score df Step 0 Variables Industry 38.176 28 Industry(1) 1.607 1 Industry(2) 1.295 1 Industry(3) 3.173 1 Industry(4) 1.100 1 Industry(5) 1.438 1 Industry(6) 1.943 1 Industry(7) 1.929 1 Industry(8) .955 1 Industry(9) .955 1 Industry(10) .955 1 Industry(11) 10.467 1 Industry(12) .290 1 Industry(13) .252 1 Industry(14) .098 1 Industry(15) 1.173 1 Industry(16) .098 1 Industry(17) 3.940 1 Industry(18) .907 1 Industry(19) .955 1 Industry(20) .955 1 Industry(21) .048 1 Industry(22) .048 1 Industry(23) 2.007 1 Industry(24) .048 1 Industry(25) 2.007 1 Industry(26) .048 1 Industry(27) .290 1 Industry(28) .955 1 Overall Statistics 38.176 28 Table : Goodness of fit Chi-square df Sig. Step 1 Step 44. 609 28 .024 Model 44.609 28 .024 Since p-value of step wise =0.024 ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 since p-value of model 0.024 ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 Then, the model is significant Step Nagelkerke R Square 1 .133 This Model Explains 13.3% of variations in the dependent variable. Table : The Classification table: Classification Tablea,b Observed Predicted stock dividend no yes Step 0 stock dividend no 508 0 yes 80 0 Overall Percentage A. Constant is included in the model. b. The cut value is .500 The model succeeded to classify all the observations of category 2 but failed to classify any in category 1 which means the model is imbalanced. Variables in the Equation B S.E. Wald df Sig. Step 1a Industry 20.461 28 .847 Industry(1) -.956 1.249 .586 1 .444 Industry(2) -1.030 1.317 .611 1 .434 Industry(3) .654 1.215 .290 1 .591 Industry(4) .223 1.187 .035 1 .851 Industry(5) .000 1.119 .000 1 1.000 Industry(6) -.916 1.212 .571 1 .450 Industry(7) -19.593 1.160E4 .000 1 .999 Industry(8) -19.593 1.641E4 .000 1 .999 Industry(9) -19.593 1.641E4 .000 1 .999 Industry(10) -19.593 1.641E4 .000 1 .999 Industry(11) .916 1.162 .622 1 .430 Industry(12) -.788 1.514 .271 1 .602 Industry(13) .000 1.200 .000 1 1.000 Industry(14) .000 1.342 .000 1 1.000 Industry(15) .357 1.233 .084 1 .772 Industry(16) .000 1.342 .000 1 1.000 Industry(17) -19.593 8.2 04E3 .000 1 .998 Industry(18) -.788 1.250 .398 1 .528 Industry(19) -19.593 1.641E4 .000 1 .999 Industry(20) -19.593 1.641E4 .000 1 .999 Industry(21) .000 1.549 .000 1 1.000 Industry(22) .000 1.549 .000 1 1.000 Industry(23) .916 1.396 .431 1 .512 Industry(24) .000 1.549 .000 1 1.000 Industry(25) .916 1.396 .431 1 .512 Industry(26) .000 1.549 .000 1 1.000 Industry(27) -.788 1.514 .271 1 .602 Industry(28) -19.593 1.641E4 .000 1 .999 Constant -1.609 1.095 2.159 1 .142 a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: Industry Since P-value of all coefficients is larger than ÃÆ'Ã ½ÃâÃ ±=0.05 Then all The Coefficients of the Model are insignificant. References: -Afza, Talat and Ch. Slahudin. (2009). Management Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence from An Emerging Economy, Corporate Ownership and Control Journal, Vol.6, issue 4, pp.88-95. -Al Kuwari, 2009, Determinants of the Dividend Policy in Emerging Stock Exchanges:The Case of GCC Countries.Global Economy Finance Journal vol. 2 No. 2 September 2009. Pp. 38-63.https://ssrn.com/abstract=1793150 -Al-Malkawi, H. N., 2007, Determinant of Corporate Dividend Policy in Jordan, Journal of Economic and Administrative Since 23, 44-71. -Ambarish, R, K. John and J. Williams, 1987, Efficient Signalling with Dividends and Investments, Journal of Finance 42, 321-343. -Black, F., 1976, The Dividend Puzzle, Journal of Portfolio Management 2, 5-8. -Brennan, M., 1970, Taxes, Market Value and Corporate Financial Policy, National Tax Journal 23, 417-427. -Brigham, F. and J. Gordon, 1968, Leverage, Dividend Policy, and the Cost of Capital, Journal of Finance 23, 85-103 - Darling, P.G. (1957). The Influence of Expectations and Liquidity on Dividend Policy, Journal of Political Economy, 65(3), p 209-224. -De Angelo, Harry, L. De Angelo. and D. J. Skinner (1992). Dividends and Losses, Journal of Finance 47, 1837-1863. -Easterbrook and H. Frank. (1984). Two Agency- Cost Explanations of Dividends, American Economic Re
Friday, December 27, 2019
Sample details Pages: 14 Words: 4225 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Marketing Essay Type Research paper Did you like this example? 2.1 CORPORATE CULTURE (Shein 1996), defined culture as: ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦. a pattern of basic assumptions that a group has invented, discovered or developed in learning to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and that have worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems. This he said is evident in the approach that members of the organizations use to perform their given tasks and the manner that key decisions about important issues of the organization are executed. The manner this is done, buttresses the organisations policy, strategy and procedures. DonÃ¢â¬â¢t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Shared definitions by learned scholars refer to organisational culture" essay for you Create order Other shared definitions by learned scholars refer to organisational culture as pattern of shared values and beliefs that help individuals understand organizational functioning and thus provide them with the norms for behavior in the organization(Deshpande and Webster 1989), a set of cognitions shared by members of a social unit (OReilly et al., 1991). According to (Laurie 2008), organisational culture is a combination of traditions, values, policies, beliefs, and attitude that establishes a general framework for everything done in an organisation. It can also refer to the form of beliefs, values, and ways of managing experience that have developed during the course of the organizations history, and becomes noticeable in its material arrangements and the behavior of its members. (Brown 1998). (Gupta 2009), in his write up, stated that organisational culture is a set of unwritten rules meant to guide the employees towards an standardardised and rewarding behaviour. Despite the d iffering definitions of corporate culture by many researchers and authors, some of them have collectively agreed that corporate culture entails combining the pattern of behavior, beliefs, procedures and values that make up the organizations identity; and also to assist in the structuring of the users behavior. It is very significant to view how people perform within the context of the group, sharing with a group of people in an organization is the main definition of corporate culture that most authors agreed on. (Deshpande and Farley, 1999). Many studies demonstrate that organizational culture is one of the most important factors with a significant role in determining how an organization performs (Chatman and John, 1994, Hofstede et al, 1990, Schein, 1990, Denison, 1990, Gillespie et al, 2007). According to Lewis (2002) organizational culture has been confirmed to be a lasting theory in the prediction of the organizations performance. In addition, many researchers such as (Den ison, 1990; Ambro`, 2004; Ouchi, 1981; Kwantes and Boglarsky, 2007; Berry and Parasuraman, 1992; Stein and Bowen, 2003) have confirmed the relationship between organisational culture and effectiveness. Some other authors have investigated culture from a strategic point of view and have presented culture as a basis of competitive advantage (Wilkins and Ouchi, 1983; ONeill et al, 2001; Hasmi and Asaari, 2007). Choe (1993) establish a strong relationship between corporate strategy and culture. He found that firms that practice the business strategy tends to have a culture that develops over time and those that apply defensive strategy tend to have hierarchical culture. According to (DeshpandÃ © 1999), investigations into market orientation suggest that the existence of an innovative and entrepreneurial culture is strongly associated with exceptional business performance. Collectively, these reports suggest that an organizational culture that puts more importance on customer-oriented b ehaviours, cross-functional teams, performance-based rewards, adjustment and reactive attitudes to change, and a higher degree of risk taking and improvement, is likely to contribute to have successful customer relations management system implementations. Detert (2000) was responsible for alerting other organisational researchers on the importance of the relationship between organisational culture and quality of services. His research shows that there is a close relationship between a quality service system and organisational culture. Starkey and Woodcock (2002) reiterated the importance of a customer oriented service system. They stressed that organizations that are less customer oriented are more likely to perform poorly in terms of sales output as against those that are customer oriented. To survive in the highly competitive retail service markets, organisations need to provide products and services that will produce highly satisfied and loyal customers (Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). According to (Asif and Sargeant, 2000), several benefits accrue to the organisation via customer loyalty such as generation of profit, costs related to promotions, advertising and start-up costs are limited. More so, chances of increase in customers will be high, as satisfied customers will recommend the organisations products and services to others. As a result, customer satisfaction can be the key factor to the growth of the business, in term of market share and profit. Service organizations were investigated by Gilbert and Parhizgari (2000) who established that different service organization cultures are successful in different contexts. Researches into the relationship between organizational culture and performance in organizations have confirmed that their culture characteristically and uniquely affected their performance Ambro (2004). Trice and Beyer (1993: 174) warn that though organizations may have unique cultures, they should not be considered to have a single, h omogeneous culture. Curry and Kkolou (2004) identify customer focus, participation, and teamwork as important cultural issues influencing customer relations outcomes. They suggested that empowering employees to excel at customer service and ensuring their job security also contribute to customer relation success. Uniformality of Organizational Culture Though organizational culture is basically termed to be the existence of shared value system and beliefs, this does not however imply that there is no sub-culture within an organization (Jermier et al., 1991). In arguing their case, researchers commented that most organisations have multiple cultures ingrained within the basic corporate culture, and these are known as sub-cultures (Ouchi, 1980; Ashforth and Mael, 1989). According to (Bellou, 2007) sub-groups in organizations can generate sub-cultures that build specific networks of meaning and meanwhile still remain associated with the ideologies and values of the organizations leadership. However, the inherent culture mutual to the generality of the organization is known as the dominant culture. In fact, when talking about the organizational culture absolutely the dominant culture is meant. Originally, it was assumed for a long period that the organizational culture is static (Schein, 1983). However, according to (Barely, 1983) many other researchers have challenged this assumption, claiming that the organizational culture is dynamic and is evolving to suit the organization growth stage. Researching the dynamic nature of organizational culture, Zheng, Yang, and McLean (2010) argued that as the organization develops through different growth stages i.e. start-up, growth, maturity, and revival, so also does the dominant organizational culture follows many stages i.e. inspiration, implantation, negotiation, and transformation. On the relationship between the perceptions of the function of the organizational culture of the employees and the customers of the particular organization, Parasuraman et al. (1985) proposed that employees can correctly forecast customer perceptions of many determinants of service quality and are mainly accurate in service quality areas such as courtesy and responsiveness. Concerning customer attitudes about service quality, Schneider, Parkington Buxton (1980) and Schneider and Bowen (1985) remarked that customer attitudes regarding service quality were significantly correlated how employees view the issue of customer service. Furthermore, Conduit and Mavondo (2001) found that the combined effects of customer orientation and market orientation have a considerably strong infuence on an organizations performance. Subramony, Beehr and Johnson (2004) confirmed positive links between employee and customer perceptions on service effectiveness, group maturity, and service quality. Ho wever, other studies do not support their conclusions. A study by Shahani-Denning (2000) disagreed by revealing that customers and employees often perceive organizational effectiveness from different perspectives. Identification of the Organizational Culture For the rationale of identifying the organizational culture system, Allaire and Firsirotu (1984) suggested that three interconnected sets of systems can assist in identifying organizational culture. Following Scheins (1990) write-up on culture, the first is the socio-cultural system, which covers organizational structures, strategies, policies, and other associated management practices. According to (Mackenzie, 1986; Thompson, 1967), this sub-system of organizational culture follows the classic theory of management that centers on attaining set organizational goals through task-oriented management. Conventionally, leaders have the prevailing role in deciding how tasks apportionment is structures within the organization. Towards this end, leaders tend to manage the core technology of the organization through clarifying the goals of the organisation, structuring the procedures that would lead to achievement of these goals, and develop strategies that convert these goals into outcomes ( Bossert et al. 1982; Mackenzie 1986). However, scholars have suggested that the development of the cultural aspects of any organization is a powerful function of the top management, meaning that it is the duty of leaders in the organization to set the organizational goals and purposes and channel their decisions effectively to all those involved (Heck, Larsen, Marcoulides, 1990; Reynolds, 1986). In developing the organizational culture, Bolman and Deal (1984) and Owens (1987) emphasized that it is the role of leaders of organizations to teach organizational values and promote organizational missions. Strong versus Weak Culture (Sorensen, 2002; Rosenthal Masarech, 2003) have argued that there is a clear demarcation between strong and weak organizational culture and the way they influence organizational performance and employees behaviors. Furthermore, it has been extensively debated by academics and practitioners that a strong culture, the measure of belief and acceptance of shared culture, is the overriding determinant of the performance of any organisation (Deal Kennedy, 1982; Peters Waterman, 1982). The strength or weakness of a culture according to (Peters Waterman, 1982) is determined by firstly, the economic value it adds to the organization in order to create competitive advantage for the organization. Secondly by the uniqueness and how valuable the organizational culture is as this will help the organization to behave differently from their rivals. Finally, the structure organizational culture of an organization must not be easy to imitate and not be transferable in order to create competitive advantage for the organization. There is a general argument that strong cultures have a greater impact on employee behavior and are more directly linked to reduction in staff turnover, the organizations core values are both intensely held and widely shared and that a lofty conformity concerning what the organization stands for, builds cohesiveness, loyalty, and organizational commitment. Based on these there have been numerous efforts by scholars to give details of the performance supremacy of some very big organizations based on their organizational cultures (Deal Kennedy, 1982; Peters Waterman, 1982). However, based on their findings, they concluded that the better performance of these companies can be attributed basically to their core value sets such as human resource management practices, customers and suppliers relationships established and maintained by their leaders. These management practices promote innovativeness of these organizations, improved the employees self-esteem and quality of work life and consequently led to competitive advantage (Peters Waterman, 1982). Notwithstanding the fact that profit is the main goal of most organization, most research efforts are spent on customer satisfaction and experiences gained within a service organization (Anderson et al., 1997). Bowen et al (2000) and Gupta et al (2005) studied organisational culture and custo mer satisfaction and established the strong link between these two factors that have great influence on the conditions of organizational effectiveness. Organizational Culture Theories Daniel R. Denison, who is a Professor at IMD in Lausanne, Switzerland has done many researches on cultural impact on organizational effectiveness. He established that there are four basic cultural traits that can have impact on positive performance and these which are adaptability, involvement, mission and consistency. The effectiveness and culture model for (Denison 1990) as this is known, represents the relationship between management, corporate culture, effectiveness and finally the performance of the organization. This model is structured to lay emphasis on the significance of association in management practices with the beliefs and principles when investigating the effectiveness and culture of the organization in relation to its performance. The Adaptability Theory According to (Denison, 1990), the adaptation theory lays emphasis on an organizations ability to accept, interpret and translate interference from the external environment into internal norms that could be the organizations goals that lead to survival or success. The three key aspects of adaptability; perception and response to the external environment, the ability to respond to internal customers and prompt reaction to either internal and external customer, are likely to have an strong effect on an organizations effectiveness (Denison, 1989), and requires the capacity to reorganize and a laid down set of behaviours and processes that allow for organizational adaptation. The Involvement Theory This theory whose feature includes constructing the individual ability, responsibility, duty and ownership proposes that a high level of involvement and participation increases a sense of ownership and responsibility (Denison, 1989). Here, employees are meant to be involved in decision making and have a reasonable degree of autonomy, and this could lead to higher performance. The Mission Theory The mission of the organization provides rationale and meaning by defining a social responsibility. Provided the organizations purpose is understood and used to guide the behaviour, discussions and decisions of the members,it leads to greater commitment and effective performance (Denison, 1989). A second major influence that mission affected on organization performance is the direction and clarity. It is the long term development for the corporation. Evidently, mission gives a clear trend and objectives for the members and organization that is provided to identify the appropriate course of action. Success according to Denison (1995) is more likely when it is goal directed. The definition of common goal shall coordinate well with the structured a positive organizational behaviour. The Consistency Theory Positive culture such as a shared beliefs, values and symbols among the organizations members will allow them to coordinate their actions, but this must be done continually. The basic concept of this theory is that inherent control systems based upon internalized values are a more successful means of achieving coordination than external controls systems which are based on explicit rules and regulations (Denison, 1995). Consistency is the necessary basis of power, direction, formation and integration and can generate an internal system depending on the support of all involved. Most effective organization seems to merge the consistency and involvement principles in continual cycles. (Denison, 1995) 2.5 MEASURING CORPORATE CULTURE Organizations are meant to understand their existing corporate culture before deciding to develop or make changes to their organizations strategy. Measuring corporate culture in the organization is the greatest technique to develop the understanding. Qualitative method can be used to study the corporate culture (Siehl and Martin 1988); however, the benefits may possibly be purchased at a cost while typically the gathered data cannot structure the basics for systematic contrasts. Corporate culture can be examined theoretically through contrasts among the departments in the organization, it is also very important to contrast the memberÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬Ãâ¦Ã ¸s reply with the organization to understand the feature of culture. Data can be gathered from various departments in the same corporation which will assist in the contrast. There are a variety of ways of measuring corporate culture depending on the cultures makeup. The cultures elements can be observable, for instance quantitative methods or conscious like behaviors and values. Corporate culture was defined in previous sections as behaviors, norms and values, which lay emphasis on the conscious elements. It can also be measured using the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, which includes interviews, questionnaire and surveys, to examine and the cultural trend (Rosseau 1990). According to (Xenikou and furnham 1996), the questionnaires must be used in order to measure organizational culture. Learned scholars, Researchers and also managers are using questionnaire in measuring corporate culture, since they are keen on understanding and amending corporate culture where necessary. Several empirical studies have been conducted to measure quantitatively corporate culture which was done by various researchers; for instance (Cooke and Laffertys 1989) developed a culture questionnaire in Organizational Culture Inventory, while (OReilly et al, 1991) developed Organizational Culture Profile. Denison and William Neale has developed the Denison Organizational Culture Survey which is used in testing the link among corporate culture and financial performance measures such as profitability, improvement, market share, growth of sales, values and the satisfaction of employees. This research will be based on Denisons questionnaire, and will be used to find the relation between corporate culture and customer satisfaction in the retail sector using (ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦ÃÆ'Ã ¢Ã ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡Ã ¬ÃâÃ ¦) 2.6 IMPACT OF CORPORATE CULTURE ON ANY ORGANIZATION In recent times, corporate culture has captured the attention of many organizations due to its effect on the organizations achievement. Researchers such as (kotter and heskett 1992) believed that there is a long lasting effect of corporate culture on the performance of the organizations. (Schwartz and davis 1981, choe 1993, Rashid and anantharaman 1997 ) supposed that there a relationship between organizational strategy and corporate culture, especially in the application in an organization of a particular strategy. Corporate culture is one of the most significant elements in the range of the behavior performance in any organization, particularly in understanding the structure of the organization. This means that the success or otherwise of the organization in accomplishing its objectives and target was influenced by the corporate culture. 2.2 Customer satisfaction Survival in todays highly competitive markets means that it is imperative that organisations have to provide services that lead to highly satisfied and loyal customers (Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). Customer satisfaction is currently the new standard by which customers are measuring business performance Nagel and Cilliers (1990, p. 4). Customer satisfaction is an organizations capacity to create awareness, attention and retain customers and also to develop customer relationship over a certain period of time. Most at times, it is often seen as the satisfaction benefited from the products or services of an organization. In addition, it is considered to be the key to a successful and long-term competitiveness. The understanding of customer satisfaction is the means of realizing the customers expectations, a source for gaining, retaining and studying organizational effectiveness in the course of service delivery. All organisations are confronted with the challenge of discovering the critical factors that influences customer satisfaction and loyalty (McDougall and Levesque, 1992) and can decide on the actions necessary in meeting customer desires if it understands perceptions. In Deshpande et al.s (1993, p. 27) definition, customer orientation is: . . . the set of beliefs that put the customers interest first, while not excluding those of other stakeholders such as owners, managers and employees, in order to develop a long-term profitable enterprise. (Slater and Narver, 1994) sees customer orientation as basically associated with customers welfare, listening to the voice of the customers and delivering service and solutions based on their best interest and wants. In recent years, several researchers have opined that organisations centering their activities on the needs of their customers perform better than those companies that do not, will more likely to meet long-term goals and increased financial performance (Homburg et al., 2002; Lytle and Timmerman, 2006; Narver and Slater, 1990). According to Darby et al.s (1997), the level of customer satisfaction can be measured through the extent to which employees show customer service orientation. Fornell et al. (1996, p96) highlight the significance of the relationship between customer satisfaction and perceived value. They identified three backgrounds of customer satisfaction as perceived value, perceived quality, and customer expectations. Some other literature also supports the relationship between customers perceived value and customer satisfaction (Hellier et al., 2003). According to (Eggert and Ulaga, 2002), perceived value can either be pre- or post-purchased as customers seek additional benefit in contrast to the cost at the time of purchase of a product or service. (Ambro and Praprotnik, 2008), argued that customer satisfaction is a concept that cannot be universally used as its meaning is based on different conditions and different points of view and is the result of individual customer judgments. Several other researchers of customer satisfaction have introduced different concepts and different views of organizational performance outcome. In Rust et al.s (1996) opinion, customer service is seen to be all about perceptions. This is more so since service cannot be tested before it is sold, and can neither be stored, returned nor exchanged. Based on this, customers understanding of service experience and interpretation of it is the crux of the matter (GroÃâÃ ¨nroos, 2001; Ross, 1995). Wilson (2002) opined that customer satisfaction is vague and complex in nature, and is generally comprised of various components measured with different methods under different conditions. ONeill and Palmer (2004) see customer satisfaction as a cognitive concept and as a state of the mind. Edvardsson (1996) argues that customer satisfaction is an individualistic concept which is uniquely understood by individual customers. This paves way for the assumption that customer satisfaction can be understood to be a web of psychological, social and physical variables, which is associated with the perceptions of a satisfied customer. Anderson, Fornell, and Lehman (1994) argue that customer satisfaction is first and foremost an emotional state of mind and the outcome of the long-term relationship between customers and service providers. Ning-jun Zhang et al (2007) show that employees are to an extent emotionally dependent on the organization and this encourages their efforts to satisfy customers. Parasuraman, Zeithaml Berry (1988) see customer satisfaction in terms of qualitative and quantitative elements of the service. Zeithaml Bitner (2000) suggested a simpler definition of customer satisfaction based on the level of customer needs and expected satisfaction, which directly affects the degree of customer dissatisfaction. (Bolton and Drew 1991; Parasuraman; Zeithaml, and Berry 1988) opined that customer satisfaction is used to measure future customer expectations while quality measures future customer service expectation, the outcome they say is this they say is the relation between expectations and performance. According to (Ambro and Praprotnik, 2008), there has been the emergence of two definitions of customer satisfaction. The first type defines customer satisfaction as an outcome of a buying experience (Westbrook and Reilly, 1983), while the second definition sees customer satisfaction as a benchmark between the actual purchase and the purchase expectations of the customer (Hunt, 1977). Researchers have found a strong and positive relationship between customer satisfaction and intentions to repurchase (Anderson and Sullivan, 1993; Mittal and Kamakura, 2001; Oliver, 1980). Nonetheless, the connection between satisfaction and actual loyalty behavior is still ambiguous, and the relationships that occur between satisfaction, intentions and actual behavior is still confusing (Rust et al, 1995) Regardless of its complexity, customers do not have any problems with the definition of satisfaction even if it is not deliberately explained (Gupta and Zeithaml, 2007). This is the reason it is so important that the management of a service organization primarily sees the customers point of view of the organisations strength that results in delivering the service that fulfils the customers social, personal and physical expectations regarding service quality. Service organizations must consider customer satisfaction as a key leverage point to differentiate themselves from other organisations (Gillespie et al, 2007). Customer satisfaction is the outcome of his or her needs and expectations which influence the interaction with service providers and other customers. The quality of this interaction impacts customer decisions to repurchase the service, his retention and the intention of the customer to recommend to other potential customers and finally to pass on useful information about the service quality and delivery. Customer satisfaction is related to different ways of interacting with the environment. A positive recommendation is a social interaction, which is positively related to customer retention, reduces transaction costs and increases long-term profitability (Jamieson, 1994, Mackey, 2005). Word of mouth has great communication power because it is a direct transmission of customer satisfaction to other potential customers. Weinberger, Allen and Dillon (1981) and Herr et al (1991), are convinced that word of mouth is more important than information about service generated by marketing activ ities. The communication power of word of mouth is manifested when the service provider fails to meet the complaints of the customer or his reactions are not congruent with the customer demands. The highest importance of word of mouth is when customer reaction to the service provider is negative (Richins, 1983). The result of negative perceptions is a dissatisfied customer, who rarely decides to repurchase the service from the same provider (Newman and Werbel, 1973). The worst case is when a customer refuses to buy another service from the same provider (Fitzgibbon and White, 2007). Word of mouth is closely related to the customer intentions to repurchase the service (Gupta and Zeithaml, 2007). Customer satisfaction in service industries To survive in highly competitive markets, organisations need to provide services that yield highly satisfied and loyal customers (Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). As Nagel and Cilliers (1990, p. 4) claimed, customer satisfaction is currently the new standard by which customers are measuring business performance. Satisfied customers are more inclined to be loyal, producing several benefits for organisations (Asif and Sargeant, 2000; Hansemark and Albinsson, 2004; Reichheld and Sasser, 1990). First, repeat business generates income. Second, it limits costs related to acquiring new customers, such as advertising, promotion and start-up activities. Third, satisfied customers often spread the good news and recommend products and services to others. Consequently, customer satisfaction is considered to be a key to organisational survival (Jones and Sasser, 1995), as well as increased market share (Rust et al., 1992) and profitability (Heskett et al., 1994). All organisations are faced with the challenge of identifying the critical factors that determine customer satisfaction and loyalty (McDougall and Levesque, 1992). Nevertheless, the service industry has several particularities that need to be taken into account. Services are more or less intangible, their production and consumption are inseparable, and customers are at least to some extent active participants in their production process while service production and consumption are simultaneous (GroÃâÃ ¨nroos, 1982, 1988). Moreover, due to the fact that the production process of services involves employee-customer interaction, it is hard to ensure consistency and reliability (Haysa and Hill, 2000; Jun et al., 1998). For all these reasons, customers perception of the service experience is frequently the only way accurately to estimate quality level of services provided (Babakus and Mangold, 1992). This is probably the reason why the argument that customers are greatly influenced by their interaction with employees when assessing services provided is gaining increased recognition within the services industry (Boshoff and Tait, 1996).