insidevancouver.ca

My house is located just a couple of blocks away from the Arbutus corridor, so I often walk along the tracks and the accompanying community gardens and enjoy the rural quality that the land brings to the neighbourhood. It comes as no surprise to know that residents of the city become extremely upset when CP threatens to bulldoze the community gardens, store railway cars on this land and start running the rails again. No one believes that CP is making these development threats for any other reason than to anger Vancouver residents who will then push the city to cut a deal with CP for the property.   As Robert Murphy states in his blog “CP”, this kind of action clearly seem unethical.

While the ethics related to this issue are very important, it is also possible to appreciate that CP would like to be paid fairly for the land. However, it is not clear what constitutes a fair price or how a value can be assigned to this corridor of land. As reported in the Globe and Mail article “Vancouver, CP Rail far apart on value of Arbutus rail corridor”, CP contends that the price per kilometre should be equivalent to that paid to the company by the city for a similar tract of land in 1996. Vancouver is suggesting a value closer to that paid in 2010 by Richmond for a section of decommissioned railway line. Given that current property values in Vancouver are much higher than property values in Richmond, CP is not being entirely unreasonable.

CP definitely has a right to be concerned about the price it is paid for the land it owns. However, as Robert Murphy suggests, the company must first and foremost act in an ethical manner and ensure that the community’s needs are protected. In the long run, it is quite likely that the public will reward CP for its choice to act responsibly.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/vancouver-cp-rail-far-apart-on-value-of-arbutus-rail-corridor/article19817326/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/clash-between-cp-vancouver-gardeners-heats-up-mayoral-race/article20086412/

siliconangle.com

What makes up the so-called “culture” of a corporation? By definition, corporate culture includes values, beliefs, goals, and actions shared by all members of an organization. Because these characteristics determine how employees interact with each other and other stakeholders, corporate culture is a crucial aspect of a company’s success.

The question is, then, how does a company establish “good” corporate culture? And furthermore, how can a company know what kind of corporate culture is good for its business?

Although creating a set of unified goals and beliefs sounds simple in theory, I can imagine that it is no easy feat to achieve – especially within corporate giants in which there are many different stakeholders with sometimes conflicting interests. The article “5 Company Culture Examples Worth Emulating” offers some insight on the subject, suggesting that successful company culture is not “one-size-fits-all”. A business in its start-up phase must closely examine its unique objectives and values in order to hire the right people and enforce the right behaviours. The article lists companies like Google, DreamWorks Animation, and Apple as models of successful corporate culture. At DreamWorks, for example, creativity is the focus and basis for hiring employees. Staff members are encouraged to take risks and engage in spontaneous discussion – behaviours which are consistent with the company’s vision and ensure that all employees take part in achieving that vision. Apple corporate culture, meanwhile, is based on innovation and striving to achieve the best. Employees are pushed hard by their executives and work collectively to carry out the company’s chief goal.

While it is useful to examine the corporate cultures of successful businesses like DreamWorks and Apple, it is important to remember that what works for one company may not work for another. Each business is different, with its own unique goals and values. The values and behaviours of DreamWorks employees, while perfectly aligned with DreamWorks’s corporate culture, would not necessarily be of value within Apple’s corporate culture. It is clear, then, that the first step in establishing good corporate culture is understanding the highly specific nature of one’s company.

http://www.staples.com/sbd/cre/tech-services/explore-tips-and-advice/tech-articles/google-this-5-company-culture-examples-worth-emulating.html

consumeraffairs.global.ssl.fastly.net

Cassie Boorn’s guest post on Penelope Trunk’s blog captured my attention for two reasons. I was first intrigued by its unconventional short-story format, in which the narrator describes being mugged by a gunman who is out of touch with the idea that victims no longer carry loose cash. On another level, I was intrigued by the underlying business message of the story: What is the right move to make when you are working in a dying industry?

As I read Ms. Boorn’s description of the gunman struggling to make a “profit” in the dying mugging industry, I was reminded of a time when I too witnessed the demise of a once-thriving business. As a kid, I used to love going to the Kerrisdale Blockbuster with my family to rent a movie on Saturday night, and was heartbroken when it closed its doors a few years ago. While it is undeniable that the video rental industry could not have survived due to technological advancements in accessing movies and television, I now have to wonder if there could have been a way for the Blockbuster brand to survive. Was there a point at which Blockbuster could have made a “pivot”, as Boorn puts it, and revamped its entire business? Was there a risk that could have been taken and wasn’t? Could Blockbuster have found a way to adapt to technological changes, instead of filling its store with rack after rack of video games?

Even when the industry your company is based upon is dying, that does not necessarily mean that you have to go down with it. Timing, innovation, and a willingness to try new things just might be enough to keep afloat.

boredinvancouver.com

When the federal government introduced new legislation in April opening up what they called a “free market” for the sale of medical marijuana, they created a tricky marketing problem for businesses in the industry.   As reported in the Globe and Mail article “Medical marijuana companies find creative ways to stand out”, the new rules did open the market for the sale of medical marijuana, but left serious limitations on the ability of new businesses to advertise their product. Because the drug is a classified as a narcotic, the rules preventing traditional advertising of narcotics apply. Anton Mattadeen, Chief Strategy Officer at Medijean, one of the 800 companies applying to enter the medical marijuana market, states that “they didn’t really want anyone to go out there and say ‘this is why our product is better’”. Medijean decided to get around these restrictions by organizing discussions with doctors, patients, police officers and other stakeholders both in person and online to raise the profile of the company. Tweed, a start-up medical marijuana company decided to go public, “counting on the visibility that would come from being the first medical marijuana company traded on a North American stock exchange”. With creative marketing strategies like these, I’m betting that both Tweed and Medijean will be able to take advantage of the high demand that is expected to develop from the sale of medical marijuana in future years.

If the rules change further, and recreational use of marijuana becomes legal, the companion restrictions around advertising of the product may also be removed. Otherwise, it would be interesting to see online focus groups discussing the advantages of recreational marijuana use.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-marketing/sales/medical-marijuana-companies-find-creative-ways-to-stand-out/article19040969/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/medical-marijuana-wait-for-the-smoke-to-clear-before-investing/article19760553/

mccullagh.org

As Jared Freedman states in his blog “Christmas-time Retailing: How Can Retailers Navigate the System?” retailers need a strong marketing strategy to differentiate themselves from the competition in the ultra-competitive Christmas shopping season. This is particularly true for small businesses operating in a Christmas shopping season amped up with special offers and price cuts that are impossible for the little retailer to match. As pointed out in the Forbes article “Selling Christmas Before Halloween: How Small Businesses Can Compete”, the big retailing chains are gearing up for large market shares earlier and earlier each year with a proliferation of catalogs, incessant TV ads and well-orchestrated email marketing campaigns. The article suggests that instead of giving up and sitting out the pre-Christmas season marketing blitz of the retailing giants, small business could do well by marketing the fact that they do not impose an all too early Christmas shopping season on consumers. Appealing to the consumers who are annoyed by the onslaught of too early Christmas marketing campaigns is an interesting idea, and maybe it would be a tactic that could be successfully employed by small businesses.   I think it would be most effective if coordinated with other marketing campaigns where the uniqueness of the shopping in a small store and the pleasure added by experiencing old-style Christmas shopping, during the real Christmas season, is emphasized.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/caroltice/2014/10/31/selling-christmas-before-halloween-how-small-businesses-can-compete/