Starbucks will be launching an app late this year that will give their customers the opportunity to make pick-up orders and pay for their favorite coffee from their phones. This decision might seem risky, however the company is aware of the difficulties that it might encounter by implementing this modality. According to the article “Starbucks Has Bigger Plans in Mobile Payments Than Most People Realize“, “the Coffee Company “has been testing the order-ahead process and conducting tests to determine how long it takes for different brews to cool”. Moreover, the company is considering letting their customers use the app to pay for goods in other partner stores.

I think this is a great idea to build customer loyalty because nowadays people are increasingly using mobile apps to purchase products and services. With this technology, customers will not have to wait anymore during busier hours. If the project works accordingly, the clientele will be happier and therefore, will be more willing to buy again. Additionally, being one of the few companies that offer this service, will attract more clients and differentiate the brand from other coffee stores. Having a point of difference will make the company stand out and reinforce the position that is has in the consumer’s mind.

References

del Rey, J. (2014). Starbucks has bigger plans in mobile payments than most people realize. Retrieved October 9, 2014, from http://recode.net/2014/07/17/starbucks-has-bigger-plans-in-mobile-payments-than-most-people-realize/

Starbucks. (2014). Image. Retrieved October 10, 2014, from http://www.starbucks.com/blogmedia/df312a67-02e2-4eee-a678-7bb5172707e1

Nowadays, more and more companies are committed to certain societal issues. As stated by the goodpurpose® study: “…values are the new currency; Purpose is the new paradigm”.

Companies such as Save on Meats shows its engagement with the community by contributing to various organizations such as Atira, PLEA, the Greater Vancouver Food Bank, the Vancouver Community College, the Developmental Disabilities Association and many others. Save On Meats’ philanthropic activities do not only involve providing free food, but also offering employment opportunities, giving free cooking classes and fundraising.

Abbott Laboratories, a healthcare company that owns brands such as Ensure, Glucerna and Similac, has a foundation that carries out several projects for the benefit of the community too, one of them is the Ultra Rice Nutrition Project. Working together with an international health organization (PATH), Abbott provides the rice consumer population in India with the nutrients they need.

Since “87% of global consumers believe business should place equal weight on societal issues and business issues” creating shared value should be a priority for every company. Moreover, contributing to the well-being of the community or the environment will bring many benefits to a company by attracting new potential customers.

References

(2014). Retrieved October 17, 2014, from http://www.abbottfund.org/

(2014). Retrieved October 17, 2014, from http://www.abbott.com/our-products.html

(2014). Retrieved October 17, 2014, from http://saveonmeats.ca/community-partners/

(2014). Retrieved October 18, 2014, from http://www.path.org

Blotter, J. (October 14,2014). Retrieved October 18, 2014, from  http://www.fastcoexist.com/3019856/10-ways-todays-purpose-driven-brands-can-bring-their-core-values-to-life

Graph. Retrieved October 18, 2014, from http://www.abbott.com/abbott-citizenship/upside-in-action/the-wonder-grain.html

Photograph. Retrieved October 18, 2014, from http://www.westender.com/news/save-on-meats-faces-multiple-lawsuits-1.1359477

The post ‘There will be no pipeline’ in The Vancouver Sun called my attention because something similar happens in my country , Ecuador. The article mentions a tension going on between Endbridge and the First Nations. The company is planning the construction of its Northern Gateway pipeline in 2015 to extract the oil from an area which is owned in part by the Yinka Dene Alliance. The group of six First Nations opposes to this project claiming that a spill would be a tragedy for their communities since most of their food comes from the Nak’al Koh River and that the waterways form an “important physical and spiritual presence.” Even if the project could benefit the community, the Nak’azdli think they should not risk their land.

In my opinion, companies should always respect and prioritize the well being of the society, they should not menace it. Even if the probabilities of a rupture is very small, the Yinka Dene Alliance is not happy with their project and Endbridge should now try to come to an agreement with them. Endbridge in this case, did not analyze carefully the externals factors before taking a decision and now their company may not be able to complete their project having wasted their money and time.

References

BlackburnNews.com. (2014, October 10). [Photograph]. Retrieved from http://blackburnnews.com/sarnia/sarnia-news/2014/10/10/enbridge-pipeline-setback/

Hoekstra, G. (2014, August 16). There will be no pipeline. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.vancouversun.com/news/There+will+pipeline/10122968/story.html

St. John’s Cathedral. (2012, May). [Photograph]. Retrieved from http://http://stjohnscathedral.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/yinka-dene.png

http://blogs.ubc.ca/reemabhide/2014/09/10/nestle-extracting-b-c-s-drinking-water-for-free/

In her article “Nestlé extracting B.C.’s drinking water for free“, criticizes the fact that Nestlé does not have to pay for the water they take from the ground while the customers are charged $1.19. I totally agree with her  in the fact that the company should not only focus on making more profit but should also think about all the stockholders, including the community.

But, how can the company care about the community if there is not any regulation that protects them? The company should just charge the customers for the cost that the company faces during the extraction of water, costs such as  machinery, employees,  administrative expenses and many others. As stated by Reema, it is unfair for the District of Hope to pay that price.

If there was a law, the company would pay for the water they extract just as it happens in some places in Ontario. However, this money would go to the government and therefore would not benefit the consumers because the price of the product would not decrease. In my opinion the most effective solution  would be that the government and Nestlé came to an agreement to decrease the price of the water that belongs to the community. As my classmate said, it is not ethical from the company to do this and I think that some actions should be taken inmeadiatly.

References

Bhide, R. (2014, September 10). “Nestlé extracting B.C.’s drinking water for free” | Reema Bhide’s Blog [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://blogs.ubc.ca/reemabhide/2014/09/10/nestle-extracting-b-c-s-drinking-water-for-free/

Fumano, D. (2013, August 14). ‘Wild West’ of groundwater: Billion-dollar Nestlé extracting B.C.’s drinking water for free – Local – Times Colonist. Retrieved October 4, 2014, from http://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/wild-west-of-groundwater-billion-dollar-nestl%C3%A9-extracting-b-c-s-drinking-water-for-free-1.587568

[Graph]. (2014). Retrieved from http://eraoftechnology.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/over-inflating-your-opinion/