"1\r\nSustainable Practice & Operations Management\r\nBusiness Level 6\r\nTerm 1, \r\nAssessment No.2\r\nIndividual Assignment\r\nStudent name\r\nStudent Edenz ID\r\nDate and Time Due\r\nAssessment Structure:\r\nLearning Outcome Number\r\nQuestion Number Total Marks Available\r\nTotal Marks ACHIEVED\r\n2\r\n1, 2 60\r\n3\r\n3 20\r\nFinal Mark /80 Final Weighting /40%\r\nPrepared by:\r\nModerated by\r\nDATE:\r\n2\r\nINSTRUCTIONS\r\n This is an individual assignment\r\n Upload your assignment to Moodle in the following way:\r\no You must follow the required file naming conventions to allow your assignment to be graded by the right person at the right time. In the name of your word document, include the following details in the same order as given below:\r\n Name this file: Stream_SURNAME_First name_Student ID_ Assign2_SPOM_2017_T1\r\n For example\r\n 2016BusL6A_POTTER_Harri_701998__Assign2_SPOM_2017_T1\r\no Files that do not follow the correct naming convention will NOT be accepted for grading.\r\no File size should not exceed 1Mb (otherwise there may be problems uploading to Moodle).\r\no Maximum font size is 12. The use of bold and/or italic text is to be limited to headings only.\r\n Remember to use your own words and stay within 10% of the word requirements.\r\n Do not copy the work of other students. Any attempt to do so will result in a fail grade.\r\n Do not simply copy sections from a textbook or the internet (this is called plagiarizing).\r\n You can use quotes from sources but they must be in quotation marks and referenced.\r\n There will be no extensions and late submissions will only receive a maximum of 50%.\r\n Include a bibliography (to show people where you got your information from) and cite any references using the APA referencing system. Failure to correctly use APA referencing will result in your assignment not being accepted on the grounds of plagiarism. For help with using APA referencing, visit http://owll.massey.ac.nz/referencing/apa-interactive.php\r\n Please regularly check your own assignment for plagiarism by visiting http://smallseotools.com/plagiarism-checker/\r\n Assignments submitted without correct in-text APA referencing will NOT be accepted.\r\n3\r\nLEARNING OUTCOMES TESTED IN THIS ASSESSMENT\r\nLEARNING OUTCOME TWO: SUSTAINABLE OPERATIONS\r\nDiscuss the meanings and methods of optimizing operational processes for achieving the sustainability goals of a business entity.\r\nLEARNING OUTCOME THREE: BI-CULTURAL PARTNERSHIPS\r\nCritique the stance of a business entity involved in a bi-cultural partnership with indigenous people.\r\n4\r\nTASK ONE: DISCUSSING HOW OPERATIONS ACHIEVE SUSTAINABILITY GOALS LO 2.\r\nReport Study: Mind Maps\r\nMind maps\r\nA mind map is a diagram used to visually outline information. A mind map is often created around a single word or text, placed in the center, to which associated ideas, words and concepts are added. Major categories radiate from a central node, and lesser categories are sub-branches of larger branches. Categories can represent words, ideas, tasks, or other items related to a central key word or Idea.\r\nGuidelines for creating mind maps:\r\n1. Start in the center with an image of the topic, using at least 3 colours.\r\n2. Use images, symbols, codes, and dimensions throughout your mind map.\r\n3. Select key words and print using upper or lower case letters.\r\n4. Each word/image is best alone and sitting on its own line.\r\n5. The lines should be connected, starting from the central image. The central lines are thicker, organic and thinner as they radiate out from the center.\r\n6. Make the lines the same length as the word/image they support.\r\n7. Use multiple colours throughout the mind map, for visual stimulation and also to encode or group.\r\n8. Develop your own personal style of mind mapping.\r\n9. Use emphasis and show associations in your mind map.\r\n10. Keep the mind map clear by using radial hierarchy, numerical order or outlines to embrace your branches.\r\nSource: Cosima, (2010). Process Optimization Methods. Retrieved from: http://web.spi.pt/cosima/sites/all/downloads/R2_EN_COSIMA_Process_Optimization_methods.pdf\r\n5\r\nArticle Study: Design, Ethics and Sustainability\r\nThe following are examples or world-class organizations where a radical change from a functionally driven to a process-based approach took place.\r\nElida Fabergé Ltd\r\nElida Fabergé is a leader in personal products, part of Unilever plc, with famous brands such as Sure, Lynx, Brut, Impulse, Organics, Timotei, Ponds, Vaseline, Mentadent, Signal. Elida Fabergé Ltd relies very much on TQM principles in the running of its operations. Numerous benefits were achieved from the use of TQM, such as:\r\n• Reduction in changeover time\r\n• Improved teamwork\r\n• Reduction in NPD cycle time\r\nThe driving themes of Total Quality are:\r\n• Continuous improvement\r\n• The importance of the customer\r\n• Empowerment of employees\r\n• Business activities as processes\r\nElida Fabergé decided to undergo a radical change for the creation of a business process management culture, driven by the following factors:\r\n• A number of key challenges which started to face company A, during the 1990s, such as the need to improve its service to retain customers;\r\n• The need to move to a European manufacturing centre;\r\n• The need to move to a European then global innovation centre for deodorant/fragrance products;\r\n• The need to “right size” the company, to improve productivity and competitiveness.\r\nThree cross-functional teams were created, each led by a director, and facilitation was provided by a consultant. The results led to the creation of:\r\n• New organization based on five core processes, including business planning/strategy as one of core processes (Figure 1)\r\n6\r\nSource: Zairi, M. (1997). Business process management: a boundaryless approach to modern competitiveness. Business Process Management Journal, 3(1), 64-80. Retrieved from: http://www.drmanage.com/images/1202965572/Business%20Process%20Management.pdf\r\nTASK ONE: DISCUSS USING A MIND MAP HOW AN ORGANISATION CAN ACHIEVE ITS GOAL\r\nFollowing on from the SMART objective you developed for ONE of these organisations in assessment one of this course, analyse how your chosen organisation can meet its sustainability objective by optimizing its operational processes. Illustrate your analysis with a mind map.\r\n(750 words, 20 Marks)\r\n7\r\nTASK TWO: OPTIMIZING OPERATIONS FOR THE PRIMARY INDUSTRY IN NZ LO 2.\r\nReport Study: Meanings and Methods for optimizing operations\r\nBPR- Business process reengineering\r\n“Fundamental and radical approach to reengineer the processes with a 'top down' approach\"\r\nBusiness process re-engineering is a business management strategy, focusing on the analysis and design of workflows and business processes within an organization. BPR aimed to help organizations fundamentally rethink how they do their work in order to dramatically improve customer service, cut operational costs, and become world-class competitors.\r\nLean Management\r\n\"Remove all forms of waste”\r\nLean manufacturing, lean enterprise, or lean production, often simply, \"lean\", Is a production practice that considers the expenditure of resources for any goal other than the creation of value for the end customer to be wasteful, and thus a target for elimination. Working from the perspective of the customer who consumes a product or service, \"value\" is defined as any action or process that a customer would be willing to pay for. With the approach to ideally design the processes and to harmonize them in a way that they perfectly fit together. To do so, all unnecessary items are identified and the process is designed as lean as possible. The targets: maximum efficiency, clearly defined responsibilities, exactly described processes and processes, traceable ways of communication.\r\nKaizen (CIP)\r\n“When things are constantly improved through many small modifications\"\r\nFor process optimization, kaizen or coined in Japanese is a management concept, which focuses on the gradual improvement of processes and on the development of people so that they are able to solve the problems and the desired results can be achieved. It's not a project, it is a comprehensive tool and mind-set to develop the business. It is used to remove problems and capitalize opportunities for Improvement. This work is driven by employees with management support. The industry was the first to use that tool by Toyota and Sony. But it is now also used in the service sector as medical, health and dental care, municipalities, schools, banks and others.\r\nSix Sigma\r\n\"Quality Improvement strategy focused on removing variability from a process\"\r\nIs a methodology for improvement, the goal is to achieve savings by reducing the causes of defects and variability in manufacturing and business processes. The method is used primarily by large manufacturing companies for example in manufacturing or automotive industry in order to become even more cost effective. Six Sigma is a statistical method within the area of quality management with\r\n8\r\nthe approach- define - measure - analyse - improve- monitor. It is frequently used in manufacturing processes to increase the quality level. The 'Six Sigma' methodology requires a special training for the company staff, it means talking about the different roles that staff can fill depending on their level of education.\r\nTQM -total quality management\r\n\"Awareness of quality throughout the organizational process”\r\nFor corporate management, TQM is a comprehensive and structured approach to organizational management that seeks to improve the quality of products and services through ongoing refinements in response to continuous feedback. TQM requirements may be defined separately for a particular organization or may be in adherence to established standards, such as the International organization for standardization ISO 9000 series. TQM can be applied to any type of organization; it originated in the manufacturing sector and has since been adapted for TQM is based on quality management from the customer's point of view.\r\nSource: Cosima, (2010). Process Optimization Methods. Retrieved from: http://web.spi.pt/cosima/sites/all/downloads/R2_EN_COSIMA_Process_Optimization_methods.pdf\r\nTASK TWO: OPTIMIZE OPERATIONS FOR A PRIMARY INDUSTRY FIRM IN NZ\r\n(A) Work with the same primary industry firm you chose in assessment one. Using insights derived from studying the above article, discuss how the firm can optimize its operational processes in order to achieve the sustainability objective you developed in assessment one of this course.\r\n(750 Words, 20 Marks)\r\n(B) Based on your study of sustainable operations theory, discuss the potential barriers you can foresee that the firm must overcome in order to successfully implement the changes you have suggested above.\r\n(750 Words, 20 Marks)\r\n9\r\nTASK THREE: MAORI ENTERPRISE AND MANAGEMENT LO 3. MĀORI MANAGEMENT: A HOME-GROWN APPROACH TO MANAGING SUSTAINABLY IN AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND November 24, 2014 Te Urewera, mai i Rūātoki Management is such a fundamental activity that getting it right matters greatly, and getting it wrong hurts more than just the managers; eventually, we are all deprived of the value organisations create. To get a sense of the scale of management in New Zealand consider these facts. On Census night back in March 2013, 356,076 of us (or 18 percent of all those employed) classed themselves as managers (Statistics New Zealand, 2013). In February 2013, there were 472,600 enterprises in New Zealand—presumably all (at least those actively in business) had managers at the helm (MacPherson, 2013). And bolstering the management occupational class were some 19,830 students working toward management and commerce degrees in 2013, not to mention those studying management at polytechnics, wānanga and other institutions (Ministry of Education, 2014). The point is simply this: upon whom do we model our style management, and to whom do we turn to understand what management is, how we do management, and how we might manage better? The answer is invariably the United States and to a lesser degree, the United Kingdom (O’Sullivan & Mika, 2012). Yet Aotearoa New Zealand is a long way from either. Moreover, given our history and location, we tend to identify these days more strongly with our Pacific and Australasian neighbours. Now there is nothing intrinsically wrong with US and UK-style management; they have arguably been the foundation of the industrial revolution, garnering the world unprecedented wealth. Scratch a little below the surface mind, and one easily uncovers signs of decay; the global financial crisis and its ongoing aches,\r\n10\r\nthe ’87 stock market crash, and the depletion of natural resources. The global search is most definitely on for alternative ways of managing that deliver the modern-day nirvana of economics, business and environmental concerns—sustainability. Together with a colleague from Christchurch, we conducted research that lays out a ‘home-grown’ approach to managing, that is, Māori management (Mika & O’Sullivan, in press). We define Māori management, Māori organisations, and Māori approaches to planning, leading, organising and controlling—the basic functions of management. We propose a theory of Māori management that offers managers an alternative set of management principles and practices that complement current methods. Now before describing what we mean by Māori management, there are two preliminary issues to address: where did the idea of researching Māori management come from, and why Māori management matters? In 1993 the late Arapeta Tahana, then CEO at Waiāriki Polytechnic in Rotorua gave me a job as his research assistant. Arapeta said: Jason I want you to study Māori management in forestry, on the marae, and in sport teams and help me to apply that learning to the bicultural management framework of the polytechnic. Can you do that? Of course I boldly agreed! As a matter of fact however I had no clue about research, what research is, or how to do research, but I did research. I believe I possess the only surviving copy of that research. Fast forward to March 2012 as new PhD student, Dr Robyn Walker in the School of Management asked me if I would like to deliver a lecture for her first year business students on Māori management. Well, I was beside myself at the prospect of addressing 300 first year students. But I discovered two things from that experience: one, there is very little research on Māori management; and two, there is a thirst for knowledge among students of all ethnicities, Pākehā, Māori, Chinese, ngā iwi katoa (all people) about Māori management. A few months later, I met John O’Sullivan of Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, a researcher with similar interests to mine. By December 2012, we were presenting our paper on Māori management at the annual conference of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management in Perth. We have since thrown everything we know about Māori management into the paper, yet it is still only a modest beginning. Now to the question of what can we learn from Māori about managing and how can Pākehā (New Zealanders of European descent) managers and others learn these methods? This is a good question that has an equally good answer.\r\n11\r\nIn 1981, American professor William Ouchi wrote a book called “Theory Z: How American business can meet the Japanese challenge.” Ouchi’s (1981) book provides a compelling account of his research into Japanese companies and how differently they seem to manage compared to their American counterparts. Ouchi describes the Japanese way of managing as a clan-based approach, what in New Zealand we might term a ‘tribal’ method. Features of Japanese organisations include: lifetime employment; non-specialised (generalist) careers; implicit control; collective decision making; collective responsibility; and holistic concern. The typical American firm of the time was cast in completely opposite terms. Professor Ouchi’s point is not to say that one way is better than the other, but simply that there is something worth learning about managing from another culture, and that there is a systematic way of doing so. Incidentally, it turns out that the Japanese way has much in common with a Māori way of managing. Apart from vast differences in economic scale and language, one of the other differences is that the body of research on Māori management is comparatively tiny; more is needed. Māori management we suggest is a mix of traditional Māori values and methods integrated with modern management theory and practice. To us, Māori management is: the systematic action-oriented deployment of resources by Māori and potentially non-Māori managers within a Māori world view (āronga Māori), to achieve purposes which are meaningful and of benefit to whānau (family), hapū (sub-tribe), iwi (tribe), Māori communities and others, in terms of both the means and ends, and which may be conducted within both Māori and non-Māori organisational contexts. (Mika & O’Sullivan, in press, p. 14) Breaking down our rather extravagant definition, Māori management is about getting things done using a variety of resources—very much the orthodox view of management. From there however, Māori management differentiates itself by reference to a Māori world view. A Māori world view brings into play aspects of Māori culture. These include: a commitment to intergenerational wealth and wellbeing; long-range planning horizons (25-100 years being common); the practice of Māori values such as rangatiratanga (self-determination), whānaungatanga (relationships), kaitiakitanga (stewardship), manaakitanga (generosity) and wairuatanga (spirituality); and the pursuit of multiple objectives—social, cultural, economic and environmental—as indicators of progress and outcomes. Māori management also sets out to benefit one’s tribe and others, meaning the general community, society, and economy. Māori management is not only concerned about what gets done (the ends) but\r\n12\r\nhow (the means). This is because of wider responsibilities to family, one’s tribe and the environment. Finally, Māori management can be practised within Māori and non-Māori organisations as a subset of what the organisation does or as an integral part of its operations. Many exemplars of Māori management exist that incorporate all the elements of our definition. Two stand out: Tūaropaki Trust and Wakatū Incorporation. These organisations demonstrate that it is possible to make money, operate sustainably and to do this in a Māori way. Let me briefly touch on each. Tūaropaki is a whānau (family) trust comprising around 2,000 owners just north of Taupō with its base of operations the settlement of Mokai. There you will find an enterprise that is about as close to being totally sustainable as one can imagine. Moreover, it is one which is highly profitable, with growth prospects and dividends that astound. Yet, as their astute chairman Tūmanako Wereta explains in his laconic way, their success is due in equal part to aspiration, luck and divine intervention (Mika, 2009). Tūaropaki’s assets include dairy farms, a geothermal power plant, an expansive green house, a communications satellite, and a stake in Miraka, a Māori owned dairy factory powered by Tūaropaki’s energy well. Food, energy and communications are their strategic priorities because these are things they know the world will always need. Waste from the milk factory and green house is fed into a worm farm, which produces fertilizer for the farms. All of this was achieved by the trustees and their advisors with the support of their owners. Only recently has the trust appointed a management team. Wakatū Incorporation is another Māori land-based enterprise based in Nelson comprising over 3,000 owners. Wakatū started with an $11 million asset in 1977, and now has assets valued over $250 million (Kono NZ, 2014). The majority of the incorporation’s wealth is tied up in property (70 percent), with the rest invested in Kono. Kono is a vertically integrated food and beverage business employing over 300 people, farming over 530 hectares of land and sea (Kono NZ, 2012). Kono products include indigenous branded wine, seafood and fruit exported to more than 25 countries. What sets Wakatū apart however is its focus on its people and its land and the values that underpin its approach to management. Wakatū views itself as a kaitiaki (guardian) of the natural resources over which it has mana (authority). This fundamentally alters the way in which management define their role, from entrepreneurs to custodians, and how assets are defined, from capital to legacies. To conclude, our research we suggest that Māori approaches to planning, organising, leading and controlling—the basic functions of management—offer managers in New Zealand a ‘home-grown’ alternative to managing their enteprises. Māori managers integrate Māori and Pākehā (Western) values and methods to produce results that matter to them. As Ouchi points out, adopting different\r\n13\r\nmanagement methods requires an acceptance that there is something to learn from other cultures, followed by a commitment to understanding the philosophy before the pracitce. Finally a question and a proposition. What distinguishes an MBA from any New Zealand university with an MBA from anywhere else in the world? If we stay true to the international accreditation bodies of which Massey Business School are a part, you might say not much. Imagine if we were able to offer the MBA and BBS with Māori management theory and practice built into lessons on accounting, finance, economics, leadership, innovation and entrepreneurship, the kind that you might see in Tūaropaki and Wakatū? Right now that is simply not possible. This is because the volume and quality of research upon which such content depends does not exist. Few are doing it. Without such research we will never know the full extent of Māori management and its contribution to management theory and practice. This is not a solitary endeavour, instead ‘many hands make light work.’ References Kono NZ. (2012, 12 February). New Maori brand seeks to boost exports. Pitopito Kōrero. Retrieved from http://www.wakatu.org/home/wakatu-incorporation/about/media/news/new-maori-brand-seeks-to-boost-exports/ Kono NZ. (2014). Kono: Pure taste of New Zealand: Overview. Nelson, New Zealand: Kono NZ Limited Partnership and Wakatū Incorporation. MacPherson, L. (2013). New Zealand business demography statistics: At February 2013. Wellington, New Zealand: Statistics New Zealand. Mika, J. P. (2009). Report on the outcomes of the Tūhoe Economic Summit, Ohope, 17 – 18 July 2009. Tāneatua, New Zealand: Tuhoe Fisheries Charitable Trust. Mika, J. P., & O’Sullivan, J. G. (in press). A Māori approach to management: Contrasting traditional and modern Māori management practices in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journal of Management & Organization. Ministry of Education. (2014). Provider-based enrolments: Field of study and type of qualification, 17 June 2014. Wellington, New Zealand: Author. Retrieved from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/statistics/tertiary_education/participation\r\n14\r\nO’Sullivan, J. G., & Mika, J. P. (2012). Encouraging Māori participation in management education in Aotearoa New Zealand: Why it matters and how it can be achieved? New Zealand Applied Business Education Conference: Conference proceedings, 1-3 October 2012. Hamilton, New Zealand: Waikato Institute of Technology. Ouchi, W. G. (1981). Theory Z: How American business can meet the Japanese challenge. New York, NY: Avon Books. Statistics New Zealand. (2013). 2013 QuickStats: About national highlights. Wellington, New Zealand: Author. Retrieved on 26 March 2017 from: http://masseyblogs.ac.nz/jpmika/2014/11/24/maori-management-a-home-grown-approach-to-managing-sustainably-in-aotearoa-new-zealand/\r\nTASK THREE: CRITIQUE THE STANCE OF A BUSINESS ENTITY INVOLVED IN A BI-CULTURAL PARTNERSHIP WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLE\r\nUsing the reading above and further research, please answer the following questions:\r\n(a) Analyse the 50% owned Māori business Sealord. Explain whether you consider this a successful company in multiple bottom line terms and identify any two problems you believe the company faces.\r\n(10 marks)\r\n(b) Having identified two problems above suggest how Sealord could incorporate alternative Māori approaches to planning, organising, leading and controlling which may diminish the effects of these problems.\r\n(10 marks)\r\n(750 Words, 20 marks)\r\n15\r\nASSESSMENT RESUBMISSION AND REMEDIAL GUIDELINES\r\nFailure to submit original and relevant work will result in a failed grade for this assignment.\r\nFailed assignments may be resubmitted depending on the results of the second assignment and the timeliness of the resubmission.\r\nIn cases where a student has failed both assignments, resubmission is not an option and remedial work will ensue.\r\nIn cases where a student fails one or more assignment after remedial work, the student will have to sit the entire course again.\r\nIn cases where a student fails a resubmission, remedial work will ensue.\r\nFees for resubmission is $55 per assignment. These have to paid to reception immediately upon receiving the grades for your second assignment. Prior to paying the fees, students must gain approval from lecturers for their resubmission by filling out the resubmission form which is available at reception.\r\nFees for remedial work is $165 per assignment. These have to paid to reception immediately upon receiving the grades for your second assignment. Prior to paying the fees, students must gain approval from lecturers for their remedial by filling out the remedial form which is available at reception.\r\nIn cases where a student has failed one or more assignment and needs his results before an approaching deadline for visa requirements, the teachers/markers are not obliged to alter their workflow to cater to that deadline.Table of ContentsTask One .................................................................................................................................................. 2Task Two ................................................................................................................................................. 4A. ......................................................................................................................................................... 4B. ......................................................................................................................................................... 7Task Three ............................................................................................................................................... 9A. ......................................................................................................................................................... 9B. ....................................................................................................................................................... 11Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 12Task OneTesco is a multinational retailer which is headquartered in Welwyn Garden City, England. Itwas founded in the year 1919 by Jack Cohen at Heckney, London, England. The organizationcurrently operates in various countries such as Asian countries and European countries,Ireland, Hungary, Malaysia and Thailand. The organization employs over 476000 employeesacross its locations and earns over GBP 54 billion in revenues. It is also the third largestretailer in the world in terms of profits which stood at GBP 129 million for the year2016(Winterman, 2013).One of the most important sustainability issue that Tesco faces was found to be in terms ofimproving and maintaining the health focus for its customers. The organization has facedsevere criticism for stocking the items which are highly unhealthy to be consumed by itscustomers and it was asked to modify its products in order to make it healthier for thecustomers to consume. Consequently, the organization made significant changes to theproducts that it sells in its stores, especially in the products sold under its own Tesco label.For e.g. The soft drinks sold under the Tesco label now has under 5 gram of sugar and theyare removing calories from the children's juice as well. The organization has also partneredwith various health focused organizations such as Diabetes UK and British HeartFoundations in order to promote health amongst its customers(Boseley, 2016).Consequently, the SMART objective as identified for Tesco can be given as follows:To reduce the overall calories in the food products sold to the customers by atleast 10%within a year for the products made and sold under the Tesco Brand.There are various ways in which the organization can achieve this goal of improving thecalorie content of their food products by improving their operational process. One suchmethod to improve the operational process within the organization in order to achieve theSMART goal of the organization is the KAIZEN technique. KAIZEN consists of the followingcomponents:1. Automation: As per the principles of Kaizen, the Automation improves efficiency andmakes work easier through automation. In the case of Tesco, by using Automation, theorganization can standardize its manufacturing process in order to ensure that every unit ofthe product has same level of calories in it. 2. Kanban: Kanban refers to getting the inventory the operations require in order toempower Kaizen. In case of Tesco, Kanban can be used in terms of sourcing the rawmaterials which have lesser calories and which result into healthier end product. For e.g.Use of stevia instead of sugar.3. 5S: 5S of Kaizen implies that the organization should support continuous improvement byimproving organization, standardization and safety. In case of Tesco, it would imply that theorganization should continuously look for alternate methods and materials which can help itto reduce the calorie content of its products.4. TPM: This refers to elimination of downtime and boosting overall production throughpreventive maintenance and training. In the case of Tesco, it refers to ensuring that all thepersonnel engaged in the production process are adequately trained and the machines andtools as used for production are properly maintained(MSG Experts, n.d.).Here it can be seen that, the SMART objective of the organization which is to reduce thecalorie content of its food products by at least 10% is featured at the core of the Mind map.The various elements of Kaizen which can be helpful to the organization towardsachievement of its organizational SMART objective are branching out from the core of themind map. Each such branch further describes the methods and ways in which theorganization can achieve its objective by utilizing the particular element of the Kaizenmethod. Thus, by implementing these principles of Kaizen method, the organization Tesco canachieve its SMART objective of reducing the calorie content by at least 10% within a yearand improve upon the same year on year by employing continuous improvement practicesas dictated by Kaizen.Task TwoA.Anchor is a brand of primary industry in New Zealand under the parent organization‘Fonterra’ which is owned by around 10500 farmers in the country. It's core business is tosell milk products around the world. It contributes in almost 28% of exports of New Zealandand has become a major part in growth of the economy. Fonterra is a company having itsown brands like - Anchor, Fresh n Fruity, Kapiti, Mainland, Primo, Tip-Top and many more.Anchor provides milk products such as- milk powder, UHT products and yoghurt(Anchor,2008). One of the key sustainability issue that Anchor faces is to reduce the waste as generatedfrom the sale of its products such as the Anchor Yoghurt. Anchor Yoghurt is a popularproduct under the Anchor brand of Fonterra and is widely consumed in the various marketswhere it is sold. It is largely sold in the plastic pouches which once used result into wastagewhich is harmful for the environment where it is dumped. Given the wide scale impact ofthis issue on the environment of the markets such as New Zealand, the organization hasdetermined to create a program under which these waste pouches as used to sell AnchorYoghurt will be converted into various useful products such as bags, lunch boxes and pencilcases which can be further used by the children of such markets. Therefore, thesustainability objective for the primary organization of New Zealand i.e. Anchor as identifiedfor the purpose of this report is to collect waste Anchor Yoghurt pouches and convert theminto useful products such as bags, lunch boxes and pencil boxes.As evident from the article by(Cosima, 2010), there are various methods using whichorganization can transform their operations in order to achieve their sustainability objectivein an efficient manner. The relevance of each such method to the organization can be givenas follows:A. Business process reengineeringThis method for operational optimization is described as a fundamental and radicalapproach to reengineer the processes with a top down approach. This method is found tobe relevant to the sustainability objective of Anchor Yoghurt because it will enable theorganization to completely redesign the entire operational process ranging from designing of the pouches in such a manner that it becomes easier to make the products, procurementof empty waste pouches from the customers, aggregation collection and transportation ofthe pouches from the customers to the organization and finally transformation of thepouches in to useful products such as bags, lunch boxes and pencil boxes.B. Lean ManagementThis system of operational optimization is describe as a method which focuses on removalof all forms of waste. The given objective of the organization entails a drastic change in itsoperational process and not just improvement of efficiency or removal of wastage. Hencelean management is not relevant to the organization's sustainability objective.C.KaizenThis process for operational optimization is described as a process where things areconstantly improved through many small modifications. Similar to the concept of Leanmanagement, the Kaizen principle focuses on making gradual improvement in existingprocess. However, the requirement of the organization's sustainability objective is to createan entirely new process which makes this process irrelevant for Anchor.D. Six SigmaSix Sigma is described as the quality improvement strategy focused on removing variabilityfrom a process. While this tool cannot be used to create the required operationaloptimization to achieve the organizational sustainability objective, it can be used at a laterstage when the process is finalized using the business process reengineering approach inorder to standardize the process and remove any variability.Thus, overall, it can be seen that in order to achieve the sustainability objective that theorganization Anchor has determined i.e. To convert the waste pouches of Yoghurt in touseful products such as bags, lunch boxes and pencil boxes, the most relevant method thatthe organization can use is the Business Process Reengineering method as it will allow acomplete rethinking of the process in order to achieve the sustainability objective. The restof the methods are found to be irrelevant in initial stages as they recommend making onlyminor changes to the existing process. However, methods like Sig Sigma can be then "