A Third World Dimension
The use of 3D printing (which I had not known existed) is amazing. University of Washington’s engineering department designed and built a boat out of melted milk cartons by printing it in 3D. Using this method is brilliant. However, the costs of using 3D printing is high. Apparently, despite how cheap the actual printer and ink is itself, the printers can only withstand creating small products like a coffee cup. So in turn, this piece of technology doesn’t truly benefit a company since the company cannot utilize it to it’s fullest potential. I don’t know how, but if there was some way to create a 3D printer to print larger and more versatile, usable objects, I think this piece of technology could truly benefit companies and generate enough profit to cover the costs of the machine and building. I think an advance in this technology would be well worth it.
Response to: “Good Teaching”
Good teaching, like most things, is all based on perception. A seemingly good teacher to me may not be the same to another student in the classroom. I’ve noticed though, it’s based on the effort of the teacher to make up for it. It’s all about trying to engage students and ensure they have the most interactive and fun class they can, in order to give students the teaching environment they need. If a student hates their teacher, they won’t care to listen or learn, it’s a fact. If the teacher does not put the effort in to communicate or reach out to their students, the likelihood of students reaching out to the teacher instead, is slim. The education system has been flawed for years now, as teachers continue to be uncaring for their students and not put the proper effort in order to help their students excel, rather than hinder them. From a business standpoint, such teachers should be replaced. It would allow for schools to have better reputations and smarter students.
Drizzle and Drought
The drought in Spain will undoubtedly hurt their sales. They were the largest producer for olive oil throughout the world but with the drought, their selling price has been inflated 50% more than last year. This introduces a huge barrier to entry for surrounding European countries. Since Spain will be charging a price so high for their olive oil, countries like Italy and Greece, the next largest producers, will reap all of the profits and benefits instead.
Not to mention the ongoing need for olive oil, or extra virgin olive oil. We use this oil in our every day cooking, everywhere throughout the world. The product is universal, despite the different qualities you may be able to find. Since it’s such a normal good, a rise in price will force consumers to stray away from the use of it. Which is why more producers will intervene, and sell the oil for less.
Defenestration
The loss of Steven Sinofsky seems as though it would hurt Microsoft sales significantly. He was head of a division that contributed about a quarter of the company’s $74 billion in revenue which means if Microsoft doesn’t choose their new head carefully, their sales could definitely suffer. As to why he left the company? It’s still a mystery. But why does anyone quit their job? Maybe it was his work environment and he wasn’t satisfied at the job anymore, after 20+ years of working there. Maybe it was his team of workers, or something more personal like family. Whichever it may be, the loss of Steven Sinofsky will hurt the Microsoft team greatly.
Furthermore, I tend to agree that the use of tiles may confuse consumers, while using Microsoft 8. It’s an interesting concept, albeit, and maybe more efficient as well, but it’s something far beyond what the typical Microsoft consumer would know how to use. It can really sway their popularity either way.
Taxing Times
I think that this tactic is a sneaky way to make some money. The companies wouldn’t make enough from passing this law because in order to have a successful newspaper they’d have to restructure their whole system instead. It’s like they want to take all the money they can from Google and that’s it. However, it is even stated in the article that these profits will hardly aid their company’s financial problems.
They also say that they want to charge readers for reading more of the article, after the first two sentences. I think this is foolish because it would act as a direct deterrence for readers and potential consumers instead. No one wants to pay for an article when you should be able to read it for free, online.
Look What They’ve Done to my Brands
Look What They’ve Done to my Brands
Despite the significant health risks associated with smoking, people continue to knowingly choose to do so. I believe that Australia’s new plain-packaging law will not make not make as much as a dent in reducing the number of packs sold. The generic dark brown identical packaging if anything will not discourage people to buy it but rather will allow the companies to save money on packaging and instead invest into another area; for example increasing production of cigarettes. Getting rid of the regular packaging will also get rid of the large warnings and graphic images that usually get printed on it informing smokers the dangers of smoking and risk of lung cancer. This could result in actually increasing demand, because the consumer is not so disinclined to buy it or quit smoking– doing the complete opposite of what was intended by the Australian government. Identical packaging will hurt tobacco companies in the sense that consumers will most likely only purchase cigarettes from the one or two brand names that they are familiar with, reluctant to try any other ones especially if they are all in identical boxes with no differentiation. However, in the grand scheme of things, this does not necessarily mean demand for tobacco as a whole will decrease; people will still smoke regardless.
Eli Broad: Uncommonly Unreasonable
Eli Broad wrote the book The Art of Being Unreasonable: Lessons in Unconventional Thinking. Eli is a “serial entrepreneur” who doesn’t toot his own horn and writes modestly about himself trying to teach others in his book instead of making it dedicated to his superiority. Broad has developed two Fortune 500 businesses all while living as an only child, struggling with dyslexia. It seems that if there’s anybody who should give themselves more credit, it’s Eli Broad. Not only is he successful in entrepreneurship, he is also an advocate of philanthropy. As a billionaire, Broad is investing in the arts, to “bring beauty, inspiration, and the shock of the new to as many people as possible.”
I think Eli Broad is an inspiration. This is the first I’ve heard of him but he seems to be a man that can do it all. He has a wife, two growing sons, two multibillion companies (third coming), and a philanthropic side. A lesson he lays out in his book is to be able to get 8 hours of sleep all while working 24/7. He’s different in that he strives to teach others the way to his success, and doable ways to approach it. He’s concise in his teachings which is how readers can really grasp his lessons. I think this is a man that I would like to read more into, and borrow his book from the library. His values seem to reach out to kids and adults of all ages, striving to be organized, efficient and successful.
Response to “The Feminine Struggle of Carrying Two Jobs.”
I’ve recently read Sean Smith’s blog post about the feminine struggle of carrying two jobs. In his post, he touches on how women are unable to climb the business ladder because of their capability to mother a child. There’s plenty of controversy that dates back about the sexism between women and men. A typical fight and women claim to be able to do what a man can do. As a woman, I believe this is true. I don’t agree that men have a larger brain capacity than we do, or that they’re ultimately stronger than us either. I also can’t agree that it’s ethical for businesses to not hire a pregnant woman, or women in general because of their probability of becoming pregnant. They speak as though a child is a disability and it causes a woman to be incapable of doing their job properly. That’s morally wrong. There are many instances that men take a leave of absence to take care of their child too, not just the mother. A child requires the love of both parents. So who are these CEO’s to say that women can’t do their job as well as them? Women can actually do this, and more. This very reason is why a company should hire women, because of their “superwoman ability” to balance such high positions, and their children at home. Having a kid should not discredit a woman, in fact this is something which sets them apart from men. Women can do it all.
Response to “[Business Ethics] Samsung in Hot Water for “Serious Labor Abuses””
I stumbled upon Robert De Luca’s blog about Business Ethics in Samsung factories, an article that is reminiscent of the Nike sweatshop article I read. Both well-known companies have been caught by the law because they’ve provided unethical labour conditions in third world countries.
Since their labels are iconic in present day society, I wonder how these companies could taint their own image in performing such unethical actions, but stand to do so and not lose any customers. I’ve realized that although Nike had a huge scandal against them, their brand is still one seen wherever I look. Kids still don them on their feet and celebrities continue to endorse the company in selling unethically made products. Reading Rob’s Samsung article, I realize the same epidemic is happening again. Samsung has shown to be unprofessional and cruel to their staff and workers, yet the new Galaxy SIII is the biggest rave.
People don’t care. As blunt as that may seem, it’s true. There will always be a group of activists that raise protests but the majority of consumers don’t care. We continue to purchase their products regardless of how they’ve been made. We don’t see the face of the poor South Korean child who slaved away just to make the phone we’re using. This is the route of how business ethics have gone awry.
In class, David Silver had come and spoke to us about how teachers are failing to teach ethics in business. I don’t believe this is true. You can give someone the tools but it all depends on how they use them. I think we’re born with these morals, or they’ve been taught to us when we were younger. But we’ve reached the epitome of our already human characteristic of being greedy. Our ethics have been skewed and we continue to support the behaviour of these companies, treating kids like they’re doing them a favour by giving them two dollars a day in a factory with toxic fumes. We’re as bad as Samsung is. I believe that this is where business ethics go wrong, because this is a lesson that you can’t possibly learn in class.
Photo via: University of Michigan Closes Ethics Center, Claims Ethics in Public Life Achieved
“Nike, we made you. We can break you.”
I recently read a short story called “The Swoosh by Naomi Klein,” In this story, Naomi analyzes and touches base on the Nike controversy, dated back to the nineties. Nike CEO Phil Knight became business hero turned Satanist when the public gained knowledge of the sweatshops all throughout Southeast Asia. He was slaving away poor children, paying less than minimum wage (two dollars a day), and inflating Nike merchandise prices 20 times the actual value. Then taking the money saved and paying celebrities such as Michael Jordan $20 million a year to endorse the company. Teenagers housed a “shoe-in,” dumping their old Nike’s on the doorstep of Nike Town. The campaign against Nike gathered so much press that Nike had agreed to raise 30 percent of the Indonesian workforce with an overall 31 percent pay increase (this amounted to a one dollar increase.)
In my opinion, this is not enough. It’s not right that Nike was underpaying their staff to such an extreme, and they should have been a lot more giving when they were finally caught. Price inflation aside, child labour is unacceptable, and to quiet down the press, raising wages up one dollar isn’t classified as an increase. It also stated that in the Bronx, kids spent their parent’s whole pay cheque on a pair of Nike’s, and a child was beaten to death for his pair of shoes. Not only are the shoes overpriced, but kids fight to death over them. An item, unethically manufactured with a price that is 20 times the cost, has become the most coveted item a teenage boy could own. But when someone took action, Nike said they were merely a footwear manufacturer, not political activists. I cannot condone this as an excuse for their inhumanity.
Photo via: Find that logo
Book review found at: Yes Magazine