Monthly Archives: November 2015

Source: http://www.first-tel.com/Specials/Free-Coffee

There is a saying that people do not know what they have until they lose it. In the workplace, coffee and free food definitely fit into that category. Last week, the company Sprint decided to boost its bottom line and cut back on costs by abolishing free coffee and food for its employees. This will save them $600, 000 annually, but the costs that come with this manoeuver may be less tangible yet make a bigger impact on the overall performance of the company.

Snacks and other small gestures are symbolic and exist to boost “employee engagement” that can begin to create that connection between employees and the job. In The Good Jobs Strategy, MIT professor Zeynep Ton draws on more than a decade of research to show how operational excellence can make it possible to provide customers with the lowest price and create a welcoming and motivating environment for employees at the same time. As we move into the new generation where switching between jobs is very common, it can be difficult to attract and retain leaders, especially young ones of Generation Y, who are going to be dominating the workplace in the future. In my opinion, while cost cutting is important and inevitable in some cases, it is not worth it to reduce costs for the short-run when it can impact the company negatively in the long run.

Source: http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/10/vancouver-friendship-socks-gifting/

Socks and friendship- when were these two words ever used in the same sentence? Perhaps rarely in the past, but that may change with the growth of a Vancouver-based Friendship Socks Company that strives to connect friends in a different way.

Friendship Socks operates on a one-to-one concept: when you purchase a pair of socks, you can also send a pair to a friend on Facebook, surprising them with a gift to brighten up their day. The hope is for the friend to remember you every time they open their sock drawer and strengthen connections between friends who may be living far apart.

However, it costs $30 for 2 pairs of socks, which is very high compared to socks sold in most retail stores. This company is clearly operating using the differentiation strategy instead of the cost leadership strategy. Like Jensen Tung mentioned in his blog, producing an entirely unique and innovative product may be nearly impossible, especially in an environment where low cost seems to be the driving source of success for most companies. However, I think there is still a chance for this company to thrive, from looking at past examples of companies with similar goals, for example, Toms. Furthermore, this gifting service will be able to solve the frustrating process of deciding and shipping presents to friends on their birthdays or during Christmas. In today’s fast-revolving world where texting and emailing are the primary forms of maintaining connections between friends, a physical item may just be what is needed to strengthen those friendships.

Receiving is a one-time thing, while learning to create is a long-lasting change. When you receive something, you take it and feel grateful, but when you learn to create and recreate, the feeling of hope and empowerment do not diminish when the shoe, or the glasses, or whatever else you got for free does.

I am against the “one for one” business model because I think it is unsustainable and one-sided. Unsustainable because it is impossible for a business to give free things to others forever, and one-sided because it is created from only one perspective- the business’s. Of course, there are probably many more arguments to support this point of view that can all be found with an easy Google search. However, the primary reason why I am against it is because I have seen better models to solve the same problem. In the video Social Entrepreneurs: Pioneering Social Change, Dorothy Stoneman from YouthBuild USA implemented a creative plan where youth with no jobs to do were brought together to build houses for homeless people. In class, we also explored several businesses that have adopted this method. I believe this method is more effective than the one for one model because it utilizes what is not being utilized to fill in the gaps for a specific need. Instead of giving, or in this case, building the houses for them, they direct others to do so, and in the process, were able to leave those youth feeling empowered to make more change in the future. This, in the long run, is more sustainable and allows the other side to actively participate instead of passively receiving what is given to them.

After a long, grueling battle, Target is inching back into Canada in the form of an online store. On Target’s international website, there is now an option for Canadians to purchase their goods and have it shipped to Canada- except at an absurdly high price.

Even though Target is boasting online about its goods priced in Canadian dollars and “low international shipping rates”, upon closer inspection it is noted that prices were often much higher than the U.S. prices and sometimes the shipping fees cost more than the actual item! Below is an example of the breakdown of fees for an item from Target shipped to Canada:

Source: https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/blogs/insight/target-inching-tentatively-back-into-canada-with-cross-border-online-shopping-%E2%80%94-at-a-price-194707264.html

I personally feel that Target’s lack of market research is the primary reason they are failing once again. It is essential that they understand the prices Canadians are willing to pay their goods, and not exceed those limits, especially since Target is primarily a U.S. based company and the competition they face in Canada, such as Walmart, is fierce. After Target’s attempt to expand into Canada and then exiting Canada, their brand reputation is no longer what it was, nor can it be the same as it is in the U.S. I think Target should just stick to serving its U.S. customer base, because as it has been proven twice, expanding into Canada is just a waste of time and money.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/target-canada-online-sales-1.3282848