Identify and select a company in an Industry you are interested in researching. Utilize publicly available company reports and company websites to identify specific technology implementations within the company you selected. 1. Introduction: Discuss the background of the Company including Industry and organizational characteristics 2. Needs Assessment: Identify Technology needs of the Company against Industry Standards in ONE of the following areas: a. Networks and Internet — This includes mainframe computers, network servers, desktops, laptops, web-based services, portals, intranets, extranets and cloud computing. b. Mobile and Wireless Technologies — This includes mobile applications and wireless devices. c. Collaborative Technologies — This includes collaboration and groupware technology such as google docs etc. d. Enterprise Applications — This includes Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) applications, Supply Chain Management (SCM) systems and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems. 3. Gap Analysis: Identify the specific Area of Need and do a comparative analysis of what the company has versus the Benchmark standards obtained from the Industry. 4. Results: Using a Liken item, how successful has the company been in the efforts to implement these technologies within the organization? 5. Bibliography: Include all references you used in doing this research.
Urban restoration is regularly commended as a gift by legislators and land designers; it is viewed as a technique for conveying monetary and social development to a generally dormant network. It is an arrangement of changes made in the expectations that new occupants come in, more organizations open, and more capital streams into the region. Be that as it may, redevelopment frequently results in the deconstruction and substitution of a previous network, uprooting the previous occupants and expanding their hardships as opposed to giving renewal. Gentrification, the procedure in which more rich occupants move into a poorer territory and change its social and monetary elements, is a term that surfaces in for all intents and purposes each discussion with respect to urban redevelopment. In this paper, I will contend that the utilization of urban gentrification for utilitarian objects is unreasonable and beguiling, and the Kantian thought that positive goal matters more than result gives a tricky tolerance. I will demonstrate the drawback gentrification causes to nearby organizations and occupants through precedents from zones that have experienced the procedure, and think about the contentions for and against the training; the impacts of rising property estimations, the adjustments in a network's organizations, and the adjustments in a network's social cosmetics will be the fundamental territories of core interest. After the exploration is exhibited, I will investigate the philosophical perspectives of Kant and Mill, and balance vision with the truth that urban networks must face in managing gentrification. At the point when well-off newcomers set up homes in a poor network, they frequently reconstruct or generally adjust the properties they purchase; by doing this, move the property estimations up appropriately. The property duties and lease increment to coordinate this up scaling of homes and lofts. These higher wage families can bear the cost of these expanded charges, and the additional assessment capital streaming into the zone for the most part satisfies the neighborhood government. In any case, for long-term occupants, this move in property estimations can be an unwelcome weight. As per an evaluation led by Daniel Sullivan, long-lasting occupants of a gentrified network have a tendency to be poorer than more up to date inhabitants. Significantly, long-lasting inhabitants frequently move toward becoming dislodged by the more current, more extravagant occupants. Koreatown, Los Angeles is a prime case of this result. In the examination "The Contested Nexus of Koreatown", Kyeyoung Park and Jessica point by point the progressions the urban enclave experienced as rebuilt itself after the Los Angeles Riots. Amid the LA Riots, Koreatown's properties endured harms that inhabitants were unable to recover from; many uprooted occupants deserted the enclave by and large. Outside venture and urban rejuvenation appeared the main way to give the help Koreatown so frantically required, yet the scientists discovered its redevelopment incomprehensible; while property estimations expanded and the town encountered an exceptional recuperation, set up occupants ended up out in the city since they were not able bear the cost of the new leases and charges. These inhabitants were for the most part nearby laborers making the lowest pay permitted by law pay rates, who all of a sudden found their flat edifices being purchased out by advancement organizations; the structures would be remodeled and revamped, and the rents would be twofold the first expense. Gentrification had exacerbated the relocation of the first network as opposed to helping them get recovered. From the perspective of the built up network, it is hard to state that urban reestablishment gave any social great to them; they had been swapped out for more up to date inhabitants. As new higher-wage occupants come in, the sorts of organizations in the zone change also. These inhabitants have more discretionary cashflow and the sorts of products and enterprises they want contrast from alternate occupants. The centralization of expert administrations and retail locations increment, while littler, nearby organizations go into decay (Park and Kim, 2008). To meet with the requests of an evolving network, a few administrations wind up overabundant to the point of insecurity; neighborhood entrepreneurs end up coming up short on the assets to remain focused and leave business, bringing about further relocation of the set up network versus the approaching network. In their examination, Park and Kim expressed there was over-immersion of pool lobbies, web bistros, karaoke bars, night clubs, room salons, and alcohol stores in Koreatown; while this gives the shopper more decision, the opposition makes for an extremely antagonistic and unforgiving business condition. The new stores and administrations can as a rule be blocked off to the built up occupants, as far as moderateness and center; it is a type of market positivism that considers just the worries of the wealthy. At the point when Koreatown was redeveloped, the new administrations were focused towards drawing in individuals to the nightlife with bars, clubs, and high-class eateries; while these organizations were well known out-of-towners and the prosperous, most of the nearby network had no utilization for such unrestrained regions. Babylon Court, an upscale mall situated in Hollywood, is likewise a case of discord among business and the network. The strip mall is a well known area for the high society with its costly retail locations and renowned theaters, yet it remain as a conspicuous difference to the encompassing network of the destitute and moderately poor who can't bear the cost of the offering of Babylon Court (Curtio, Davenport, and Jackiewicz, 2007). By and by, the intrigues of the gentrification procedure have not helped the network, but rather hampered it; outside venture and new organizations that were assume to revive a battling network have rather distanced and ambushed the long-term inhabitants. At the point when reestablishment is instituted for the benefit of a network, the current network is only sometimes the recipient; rather, the network is relentlessly changed and supplanted with the goal that rejuvenation is a consequence of another masses. Expanded enhancement and social blend does not happen, but rather substitution and isolation are frequently the outcome when managing gentrification. In "Gentrification and Social Mixing", Loretta Lees expressed that center newcomers into urban networks self-isolated themselves despite the fact that they surveyed for decent variety in an area. This procedure of gentrification is frequently helped by social arrangements made by the state. One case of that event is Cabrini Green in Chicago. In 1994, it qualified "the most pessimistic scenario of open lodging in the US", and was thusly given $50 million to redevelop; the destruction and vouchering out that pursued dislodged a critical segment of low-pay occupants and reproduced the network as a white collar class neighborhood (Lees, 2008). The UK created comparable arrangements; the London Borough of Brent New Deal for Communities venture subsidized the destruction of pinnacle squares and made more than 1500 exclusive units, yet at the loss of 800 openly possessed units (Atkinson, 2008), uprooting low-wage inhabitants. The previous network is pushed out by the adjustments in the nearby economy, and an unpretentious social purifying happens, while approach creators parade their adoration for social utility and the general population great and guarantee they are lightening the neediness of urban zones. An utilitarian activity should result the best joy for the best measure of individuals. J.S. Factory requested experimentation in deriving what profited the entire, yet gentrification puts the bliss and encounters of unmistakably extraordinary gatherings at chances. Does gentrification serve the joy of the old inhabitants or the new occupants? Experimental examination of information discloses to me the old inhabitants are basic deny in gentrification and more current occupants are essential concern. Is the more prominent satisfaction a matter of populace amount or is it a matter of populace quality? Another observational examination uncovers gentrification is process that favors individuals of higher pay, a matter of value as opposed to amount. My examination uncovers gentrification results in the best satisfaction for the few, as opposed to the many. So I offer the accompanying conversation starter: how can one legitimize gentrification as serving more noteworthy's benefit? Social arrangements upholding gentrification guarantee they have enhanced and rejuvenated urban networks, when all they have done is dislodge the set up low-wage families to influence it to appear as though they have lessened neediness in the zone. This misdirection is something I disagree with; even Milton Friedman, a man who was likely steady of urban recharging rehearses, regurgitated bitterness at utilizing the reason of "social great" to accomplish an individual motivation. Gentrification for the sake of social utility is a disappointment, however Immanuel Kant said respectable expectation matters more than result. Be that as it may, honorable aim is something emotional; what is respectable to one individual isn't really respectable to another. The outcomes of gentrification are critical and expansive and to pardon the procedure dependent on an abstract perfect is a liberality too effectively allowed. In obligation based morals, a man must consider his optimal as though it were a general proverb; in the event that it is conflicting, at that point it is a defective perfect. Assume everybody circumvented hurling individuals poorer than themselves out of house and home, obliterating and revamping properties for their own utilization; this would result finish mayhem, with individuals of every social remaining in irate clash with each other. Through arrangement making, defenders of gentrification have additionally diminished the possibility of network to an area of a guide instead of individuals; Kant would be shocked the absence of regard for the sway of the person. Expectation alone can't spare the strategy of gentrification; it is something defective by emotional motivation, and Kant's target beliefs can't be adequately connected to the substances of the circumstance. >GET ANSWER