dlehnersauder

Communication between suppliers and retailers is the most crucial part of a supply-retailer relationship. In the realm of technology products, communication is especially important. This is because technology is continually changing; products are constantly improving and innovating, and suppliers and retailers need to keep up with ever-changing consumer demand. For a technology business to succeed, turnover rates must be high because “unsold inventory only loses value as newer technologies hit the market”[1]

The relationship between retailers and suppliers in technology is best exemplified by Best Buy. Best Buy can predict, for example, consumers will demand DVD players in the future, and Best Buy tends to order product about 6 weeks before they want them on the shelves. However, it may take twice as long for suppliers to manufacture and deliver the DVD players. Suppliers therefore must predict Best Buy’s ordering habits, and consumer behaviour to keep up with the orders. As the suppliers become further removed from retailers, the guessing increases. Communication is key between retailers and suppliers to minimize blind guessing.

The global recession has revealed the importance of communication in the technology supplier-retailer relationship. Technology suppliers tend to have extremely limited inventory, and huge turnover rates. When the economic crisis struck, suppliers significantly slowed production in an attempt to withstand the harsh marketplace. They did so to match with retailers, who’s plummeting sales forced cutbacks in inventory orders. The phenomenon that followed was suppliers frantically cut production. Retailers were understocked; a downward spiral of low production and low inventory occurred, diminishing profits and prolonging the recession.

If communication was better between suppliers and retailers, perhaps they could have avoided the inventory crisis that was nothing but detrimental to business. If possible, retailers, like Best Buy, should communicate to suppliers what they need with an appropriate time-span. This will allow suppliers to keep up with production, improve inventory turnover, and not force them to estimate what and how much they need to manufacture. Improved communication would benefit all facets of business in the field of technology. Communication is key.

Daniel Boissonneau-Lehner

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260855682928885.html

I may be the only youth in the world who is more interested in Facebook as a business than Facebook as a service. Facebook’s success as a private company can be largely attributed to the freedom co-founder, President and CEO Mark Zuckerberg grants his employees.

The following video offers a little insight into Zuckerberg as a manager, and the Facebook work environment:

The organizational culture created by Zuckerberg is relaxed, unstructured and open. Employees can come and go as they please, with no standard work schedules, thus more employee freedom. The Facebook offices are open, with undivided desks scattered across large rooms. Zuckerberg himself works among the employees in the open workspace.

The openness, according to Zuckerberg, encourages collaboration, team-work and an informal atmosphere and communication. Moreover, if employees need to unwind on the job, they can play video or table-top (foosball/table tennis) games.

Employees working to their suitability permits employees to self-determine their job satisfaction in the Facebook organization. Job satisfaction is the primary factor in intrinsic motivation. Productivity is a direct result of intrinsic motivation. Therefore, due to the organizational culture established by Zuckerberg, Facebook employees are satisfied with their jobs and as a result do their jobs well.

The next challenge that will test Zuckerberg’s managerial abilities is the inevitable transition of Facebook from a private to a public company. Zuckerberg is worried that going public will reduce Facebook’s flexibility. If Facebook’s organizational culture can be maintained once the company is public, Facebook will most likely prove to be a very successful company for years to come.

Daniel Boissonneau-Lehner

http://www.fastcompany.com/mic/2010/profile/facebook

Gap, Inc. is currently in the process of reshaping their brand identity. Annual sales have not increased since the 2005 fiscal year, and Gap has devised a new business strategy, setting their target market as “consumers in their 20s and early 30s”[1]. Not only is Gap changing their target market, but their brand identity as well, “switching from ‘what was classic, American design, to modern, sexy [and] cool’”[1]. In order to enact this business strategy, Gap, Inc. set a new tactic.

Gap’s new tactic is a logo change. Gap believes the change in logo will revamp the brand, and show consumers that Gap is changing. The logo change is supposed to demonstrate Gap’s new image to appeal to a new target market, but initial response to the logo has been negative.

Could it be that Gap’s tactic is not to simply change the logo to re-position their brand to consumers, but to change the logo to garner consumer outcry and media attention. This would bring more attention to Gap’s reshaped brand identity and new target market. A logo change may garner some consumer intrigue and awareness, but news coverage and public commotion elevates publicity of Gap’s new strategy plan to a new level. If this is the case, the logo change is an impressive tactic executed by Gap, Inc.  to achieve their strategy.

Daniel Boissonneau-Lehner

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marka-hansen/the-gaps-new-logo_b_754981.html

In class 7, finances was the topic at hand. Among the vast array of topics involving finances, investors’ decisions on safe or risky investment opportunities was mentioned. More specifically, the topic of stocks as an investment to receive return was discussed. Stocks are a risky method of investment, and thus often yield negative return.

With that in mind, I came across a morsel of information regarding Microsoft that could attract or repel current or potential investors: “Microsoft will formally unveil Monday a lineup of smartphones using the revamped version of its mobile operating system, Windows 7. The phones will be available through AT&T and T-Mobile USA.”[1]

This small piece of information grants investors the insight they need to decide if they want to, or do not want to invest in Microsoft. Investors could look at the successes of competitors in the smartphone market, such as RIM’s Blackberry, Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android and think Microsoft phones would thrive in the marketplace and the investment would yield positive returns. Other investors might look at the past failures of Microsoft in portable electronic devices (the Zune) and decide not to invest.

The relationship of risk and reward in business finances is often indistinct, and an individual’s interpretation of information can lead to a great, or terrible investment.

Daniel Boissonneau-Lehner

Proctor & Gamble innovated brand management when they released Tide to the laundry soap market in 1946. They created a new kind of product, laundry detergent, and thus positioned Tide as the first, and the leader, in the newly created market of laundry detergent. Flash-forward sixty-four years, and Tide laundry detergent is still positioned as the most popular brand of detergent in North-America.

So why re-position an industry leader? Following the 2008 world economic crisis, consumers became more frugal. To appeal to this growing, new demographic of consumers, Tide launched Tide Total Care. The detergent was initially targeted to the fashion adept by promising that Total Care preserves clothing better than competitors. However, Proctor & Gamble knew that Total Care, more importantly, would appeal to the thrifty consumer because of the promise of the product allowing the consumers to stretch the lifespan of their wardrobe.

Proctor & Gamble continually prove that effective brand management is essential in competitive marketplaces. Playing off Tides position as number one in consumers’ minds, P&G introduce new products to appeal to a broader range of buyers, and in doing so, solidify their position as industry leader. If  P&G can keep this up, their future success as a business is a cinch.

Daniel Boissonneau-Lehner

http://www.piercemattiepublicrelations.com/2009/04/tide_and_woolite_reposition_th.html