I will pay for the following article An IT Strategy for MDCM. The work is to be 6 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page. Each of the company’s subsidiaries operates autonomously and so they compete on their own terms instead of as one company. It, therefore, means that the price that the company pays for its products is too high when compared to the competition. This is even more so with the large number of suppliers that MDCM deals with as a group. Additionally, MDCM is not obtaining time-critical information that will allow it to produce and manage its operations more efficiently.

Based on the information given in the case the overall strategic goals of MDCM at this time are to improve its organizational structure, improve its information systems, reduce its operational cost and gain a greater market share. This can only be done through the integration of MDCMs information systems both departmentally, regionally and worldwide. The company has recently done some major re-organizations but the root cause of the problem has not been fixed. The CFO has indicated that margins have been shrinking for eight quarters with too much working capital and an inefficient cost structure (p.1).

The structure of MDCMs operation does not augur well for its efficient operations. The company has done some restructuring and has reduced its staff complement but it still needs to do a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of its operations in order to see what additional restructuring is required.

The Chief Operating Officer (COO) has indicated that because of the inability to forecast MDCM is spending almost three times as much as the company needs to spend on materials because of having to expedite the process in order to satisfy the needs of customers. Production cannot be scheduled properly because of the rush to satisfy the immediate needs of customers. All of this suggests that the company does not have the information that it needs to plan or is not getting the information early enough in order to carry out its operations efficiently. Indeed the COO has indicated that the forecasting is terrible (p. 1). The COO has also pointed out that the logistic outsourcer is also a problem which would also imply that the supplies are still not getting to customers on time.

I will pay for the following article Yoda’s Law and Competitive Exclusion. The work is to be 7 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page. In any given environment, two or more individuals tend to share resources such as light, food, space, and oxygen. These gradually result in competition among the populations when such resources are insufficient to satisfy all their requirements. Intraspecific competition arises in a situation in which some species compete for resources such as food, breeding site, and water. In this type of competition, the size of the population is determinant on the availability of such resources. A good example reflects a tropical rain forest whereby frogs compete for shelter from predators during the day, and when there are numerous shelter sites, predators take fewer frogs, and their population size increases. On the other hand, interspecific competition takes place in a situation in which different species compete for resources. For example, sea birds, shags, and cormorants live and nest on the same type of cliff and all eat fish from the sea (Tool, Sue & Susan 34). The principle of, Law of the minimum by Liebig follows that growth is controlled not by total resources available, but by the scarcest resources identified as the limiting factor. This concept has been applied in developing ecosystem models. For instance, the growth of plants may depend on factors like. sunlight or mineral nutrients. Here, the availability of these factors may vary in the sense that, at any particular time one becomes more limiting when compared to the other (Sharma 103).

Self-thinning (Yoda’s Law) relates average plant biomass to density when density-dependent mortality occurs, such that populations decline in density as biomass increases. This law asserts that the mean weight per plant increased faster than density increased by a power-law equation with an exponent -3/2 (Rockwood 136). The paradox of the plankton explains the reasons why it is possible for such a large number of plankton species to coexist in the apparent homogeneous pelagic environment. According to Gause’s 1934 experiments, two species competing for the same resources cannot stably co-exist under otherwise constant conditions.&nbsp.Gause carried experiments on populations of the protozoa Paramecium aurelia and P. caudatum in which, the growth in numbers of these populations was observed when each of the species is living alone, and when both were living together in a constant volume of nutrient medium. Gause demonstrates that given two species, with the same niche, coexist in the same ecosystem. one will be excluded from the community because of intense competition (Burton 182).&nbsp.