Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorSandra Lambert.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPaladino, David J. (David Joseph), 1966-en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-03-29T18:23:32Z
dc.date.available2006-03-29T18:23:32Z
dc.date.issued2000en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/32199
dc.descriptionThesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 2000.en_US
dc.description"September 2000."en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (leaf 85).en_US
dc.description.abstractAccording to the work of Churchill and Lewis (1983), the evolution of a firm follows five stages of growth. As a small company progresses through the first two stages, the entrepreneur/owner and the company act as one unit. Once small companies emerge from the first two stages of growth, they have a choice of entering the success-growth stage of small company growth. At this stage, entrepreneurs can no longer complete all the meaningful tasks themselves. This research will address the problem of how and why entrepreneurial real estate development firms have organized their companies as business process enterprises at this stage of growth. There is an important distinction between a business process and a business process enterprise. A business process is the way in which a company performs a particular task, such as developing a project or doing a deal. Many real estate firms at the survival stage of growth believe incorrectly that putting in place an individual business process is the same as designing a business process enterprise that positions a company for future growth. A business process enterprise is an orientation in which a set of well functioning processes is linked together to create a strategic service vision. Three firms that had progressed past the startup stage of growth and were using business processes as a means of managing continued rapid growth were studied. The work of Heskett, Sasser and Schlesinger (1997) was used as a framework to study the cases because the authors see a process enterprise as the way to achieve customer satisfaction. This is done through the creation of a strategic service vision that is carried out through detailed operational service delivery strategies that create measurable value for the customer. Although the firms analyzed by the scholars in this work are large multinational companies, this research has found that the concepts underlying process enterprise are relevant to small firms. Heskett's service orientation makes that theory particularly relevant to real estate companies at this time. Moreover, this work concludes that a business process enterprise orientation becomes important when a real estate company moves from the survival stage of growth to the success stage of growth.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby David J. Paladino.en_US
dc.format.extent85 leavesen_US
dc.format.extent5470590 bytes
dc.format.extent5478508 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
dc.subjectUrban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.titleBusiness process enterprise and small real estate companiesen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning
dc.identifier.oclc48528475en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record