Author: EvaLiu

The United Nations is one of the world’s most vital and powerful organization. However, due to its power and influence, it is mainly dedicated in resolving macro problems like world peace and various conflicts. For such a large organization, it is impossible for it to address many of the less pressing micro issues. I believe it is therefore necessary for social enterprises and programs like the Arc Initiative to exist even if the United Nations was fully funded.

Since larger organizations generally do not deal directly with the ones involved, their help is oftentimes small, short-lived, and rendered somewhat useless to many that need help. Oftentimes the help is provided just for the sake of doing something, and not a lot of though is put in on whether the help will be beneficial in the long run or not. Uwonkunda, a leader in the Arc Initiative program in Rwanda even mentioned that “non-profits that have donated money to Rwanda following the war [did not] make a lasting impact.” Programs like the Arc Initiative and social enterprises are powerful because they directly educates people in impoverished areas, and unlike larger organizations, the help they provide is long-lasting and useful as they are teaching skills in addition to providing help. These services have a unique and common goal of wanting to improve the future lifestyles of the people, by giving them the means of doing it themselves and not just “sponsoring” them, because that ultimately will not solve the problem. Both the United Nations and programs like the Arc and social enterprises are fundamental in creating equal opportunities around the world, it just depends on the situation to see which will provide the better aid.

References:

http://news.ubc.ca/2014/06/30/upward-arc/

Picture from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/11/19/1384876037021/social-enterprise-wordle–009.jpg

In Gaurika Sharma’s blog post, “Alibaba’s World Debut,” Sharma believes that Alibaba, a Chinese e-commerce company that aroused much attention for having the largest IPO, will be able to successfully enter the global market.

My opinions differ from Sharma’s as I do not believe that Alibaba will have a such easy time entering the global market. The main reason is due to the extremely high barriers of entry already in place. The United States, for example, already heavily relies on online retailers, like Amazon and Ebay, who basically provide the same service as Alibaba. It would hard for Alibaba to compete in the same market as these retailers who already have a great competitive advantage from being the industry for so long, providing them with a strong and loyal customer base, as well as strong partnerships with national companies (for shipping and supply). If Alibaba is offering basically the same service, I personally do not believe that consumers or product suppliers will be willing to suddenly want to change online retailers. 

This case can also be compared to when Amazon tried to enter the Chinese market. Amazon failed miserably, only attaining less than one percent of China’s huge e-commerce market, as Alibaba, being the first e-commerce company in China, already had a competitive advantage that was unchangeable.  

Amazon’s small market share in China shows that just because a large company is successful in one part of the world does not mean it will be equally successful in another. I strongly believe that the same problems Amazon faced might also apply to Alibaba’s entry in the global market.

References:

Alibaba’s World Debut

http://www.tutor2u.net/blog/index.php/business-studies/comments/alibaba-beats-amazon-to-the-e-commerce-prize-in-china

http://www.stockwatchweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/about_alibaba_logo11.jpg

In Peter Lee’s blog post “Downfall of the McDonald’s dynasty,” Lee discusses how McDonald’s stagnant core value proposition of cheap, fast, and delicious food, is no longer working as consumers become more health conscious.

In addition to Lee’s points, I have also noticed that McDonald’s current value proposition is no longer reflective in their prices. The increase in employee wages and food prices are making it so that people are getting the same low-quality food at a now unreasonable price. The reason McDonald’s was so popular over the years was because the low quality of their food could be justifiable by its equally low prices. However, now, after the price increases, I personally would not prefer to go to McDonald’s over other fast food chains if I have to pay more than five dollars just to get a burger made with the same low-quality ingredients. If I was willing to spend that much money on food, I might as well just go to a casual-dining restaurant and pay the same price for better food made with “quality” ingredients.

In my opinion, McDonald’s seems to be undergoing a sudden “identity crises.” They are no longer focusing on cost leadership (by providing the cheapest food), nor product differentiation (by providing specialty menus). The only reason they are still doing relatively well is because they still sit at top of the perceptual positioning ladder in the consumers’ minds. However, that does not mean that their position is unchangeable. McDonald’s need to do something fast before cheap, low-quality burgers become a thing of the past. The barriers to entry in the industry are as low as ever, and their competition is gaining up on them fast.

References:

Downfall of the McDonald’s dynasty

Picture from: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Mcdonalds-90s-logo.svg/2000px-Mcdonalds-90s-logo.svg.png

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-20/mcdonald-s-costly-burgers-send-diners-to-fancier-rivals.html

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-23/mcdonald-s-new-dollar-menu-goes-up-to-5

In light of Starbucks’ announcement to launch a delivery service to account for their recent decline in sales, Matthew’s blog post on RGB Social provides an insightful response, as he believes that by initiating the new delivery service, Starbucks will add to the customer experience, and develop client relationships by providing a change to their brand experience, which consequently ties in with what we learned in class 8 on brand positioning and value propositions.

Unlike Matthew, I feel that even if Starbucks does introduce this new delivery system they will not necessarily provide a significantly better customer experience. Starbucks’ main point of difference and value proposition lies in their ability to provide excellent customer service and the perfect environment for a quick meeting or chat.

If customers simply ordered by delivery, they would be forgoing the whole experience of walking in the store and interacting with the employees, and in theory only be getting the coffee. Coffee shops in history were not a place necessarily made just to drink coffee, but more as a meeting place for people to have meaningful intellectual conversations in. Though that idea has shifted over the years, it still serves as a place for people to rewind after a long day and meet up with friends or clients. I believe that people do not go to Starbucks because their coffee is “incomparable” to other shops, but more so for the experience itself. So would people be willing to pay the additional delivery fee on top of the already pricer price just to drink their maybe now “cold” coffee at home? At least I would not. If people did not care about the experience at all, they might as well just invest in a good coffee maker.

References:

http://blog.rgbsocial.com/2014/11/04/what-starbucks-delivery-service-has-to-do-with-storytelling-customer-experience-and-social-media/

Picture from: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2182/5696698102_ba3bdcdf60.jpg

Living in Vancouver for most of my life, I never really wanted or had to take a taxi to get anywhere. The whole system of having to call them first and then pay a hefty sum of money when I could easily take the bus or skytrain, made the process quite unappealing. 

Class 14 on innovation and entrepreneurship gave me the inspiration to write this blog post on Uber. Like how email has disrupted the postal mail industry, Uber, a taxi like car-sharing app, is a new disruptive innovation that is posing dangerous risks to the taxi industry. Even though, with plans to expand to Vancouver many external forces are trying to lobby Uber’s entry into the market, I believe we should encourage the entry of Uber into the taxi industry. 

One of the most important reasons is that recently taxis travelling from the YVR are to apply a set price based on different zones. What I find really absurd about this new regulation is that with the new set rates, taxi drivers are basically able to charge more depending on which corner they choose to drop the passengers off of, making the inconvenient experience even more inconvenient. This issue has already caused much debate, and I personally would much rather turn to a company like Uber, where the customers are given the flexibility to choose the price, even though prices might be higher depending on the time and day.

This will also increase the competition between the taxi companies and Uber-like services, which might finally lead taxi companies to decrease their prices to keep up with the competition, giving consumers more affordable choices on the market.

References:

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Taxi+community+cries+foul+over+Uber+lobbyist+also+serves+Vision+Vancouver+executive/10277843/story.html

Set fares for taxis leaving YVR for Vancouver, Richmond destinations

Pictures from:

https://utstatic.a.cdnify.io/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/uber11.png

Set fares for taxis leaving YVR for Vancouver, Richmond destinations

Many First Nations in Canada strongly believe in the importance of preserving their ancestral land that has not only belonged to them for centuries, but served as a strong part of their cultural identity. With increasing new industry expansions and developments threatening their once sacred and untouched land, many First Nation are not afraid to take a stand against such proposals. After the introduction of Kinder Morgan’s new proposed pipeline expansion, the Tsleil-Waututh and First Nations from Vancouver Island met on Se

ptember 21 to sign a treaty in order to put a final stop on the proposal. The treaty is said to address the fear of rising cancer rates near the Alberta oil sands. This article is of direct correlation to how First Nations can serve as an external factor that can significantly influence an organization’s business plan, as many clans hold substantial political power. The article “Tsilhqot’in set to declare site of New Prosperity mine a tribal park,” mentions similar actions other First Nations in Canada take to prevent potential harm to their land. The First Nation’s firm stand on protecting their ancestral land in not only to protect their heritage but also serves to protect our environment and citizens from potential harm, keeping the land safer for future generations. This is something that we as members of the society need to learn from as it affects us all. Though economic prosperity is important to the success of our society, is it really worth the ultimate sacrifice of various aspects that improve our quality of life, such as health and a clean environment to live in?

Reference:

http://www.biv.com/article/2014/9/coastal-first-nations-sign-treaty-stop-kinder-morg/

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Unilateral+park+declared+Tsilhqot+includes+Prosperity+mine/10192766/story.html

http://calgaryrealestate.ca/images/2011/11/Golden-Forest-by-Ian-Muttoo.jpg

After the much hyped American retailer, Target, launched in Canada in March, the sales did much worse then expected. Target may be finally changing things around with their new adjustment in prices. Target in the United States is popular and successful due to its discount retailing approach. They are able to bring customers a vast assortment of discounted merchandise in one convenient store. However, when it was first introduced in Canada, many customers thought the price was too high for their “discounted” claims. When compared to other stores like Wal-mart and Shoppers Drug Mart, the was no visible price difference despite it being a “discount retailer,” making the company lose its biggest value proposition. As a result of this Target did very poorly in Canada during the first few months and it began to seem not that different from Zellers, a similarly styled Canadian company that struggled in sales prior to its purchase by Target. Only recently has Target finally decided to lower its prices and is now winning the price battle with Wal-mart. When comparing 33 items in grocery, heath, and beauty aisle, Target’s prices were cheaper by 3.9% than Wal-mart. With the introduction of the new prices, Target has found a strong advantage with its new cost leadership strategy. With this new leadership strategy, customers will finally have a very good reason to choose to shop at Target compared to other retailers. 

References:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/09/24/target-canada-walmart-prices-kantar_n_5870342.html?utm_hp_ref=target-canada

U.S. retailers getting chilly reception in Canada

Sears and Hudson’s Bay have once been the two major competitors in Canadian department store retail. However, in recent years the Canadian retailer has found growth and expansion while the American retailer is slowly backing out of Canada with major layoffs and closures. The reasons to why become quite evident when you compare the existing Sears stores with Hudson’s Bay stores. Hudson’s Bay improved their services over time and adjusted to the changes in consumer trends while accounting for different customer segments. In addition to their constant renovation of their stores, by bringing in popular, higher-end brands like Polo Ralph Lauren, Alaia, Jason Wu, and Proenza Schouler, to appeal to higher class consumers, collaborating with popular retailer, Topshop, to appeal to younger, trendy customers, and at the same time keeping their affordable in-house brands as well, they extended their customer segments to reach basically everyone. Sears stores on the other hand, has undergone minimal change and expansion in both company brand and products, sticking with the same lower-quality and affordable products, which target a very specific customer segment. Not to mention most of their stores still look the same as they did ten years ago. This alone gives consumers little incentive to shop there given the atmosphere and lack of selection, since competitors like Hudson’s Bay and Target can probably offer better and more varied things with minimal price difference. Even successful businesses, like Sears, need to constantly undergo changes in accordance with the ever-changing consumer tastes in order to become successful even as time passes by.

References:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/new-look-hudsons-bay-pushes-retail-growth-plan/article10836382/

http://www2.thebay.com/theroom/

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/29/sears-canada-layoffs-job-cuts_n_4690554.html

The unique aspects found in a company’s business model is often what sets it apart from competitors and gives it the lead in the industry. Making a unique yet efficient business model is key to growing the company and expanding into new markets. Take Japanese retailer Muji for example, the retailer, that produces household and consumer goods and known for its “no-brand” philosophy, is set to enter the Canadian market by opening 7-8     stores in the next five years. The brands unique value proposition of environmental friendliness, simplicity, and functionality design sets it apart from many competitors and fits extremely well with Canadians own environmentally clean and stainable image. Though the brand’s image targets and attracts a seemingly specific customer segment (think wealthy and trendy urbanites), the vast assortment of quality everyday products is bound to draw much attention from the mass market. In addition to its unique value propositions, the brand’s distribution channels, as it prepares to launch in the Canadian market, is also quite different. Unlike Target, who has also recently just launched in Canada, Muji does not plan on opening multiple stores at once, but instead focuses on one store per year. This will increase the amount of attention put on each store and will eventually lead to more customer awareness on the brand, and will be perhaps a better idea since despite Target’s vast popularity in the United States, its sales in Canada have seen a steady decrease overtime. 

References:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/09/29/muji-canada-toronto-vancouver_n_5902066.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-business

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/same-store-sales-at-target-canada-tumble-11-in-second-quarter-1.2741617

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/target-canada-s-failed-launch-offers-lessons-for-other-retailers-1.2711149

http://www.muji.us/

As consumers are increasingly looking for cheaper and better products, businesses are starting to put less emphasis on business ethics, moving factories to countries where laws and regulations regarding working conditions are less severe, and more time on minimizing cost.

On April 24, 2013, Rana Plaza, a garment factory in Bangladesh, collapsed due to unsafe building conditions, resulting in the death of over 1,000 people. The factory manufactured apparel for many well-know brand such as the Joe Fresh, Mango, and Walmart. The article Bangladesh’s Rana Plaza factory collapse spurs change, finger-pointing discuses the measures several companies took in the event’s aftermath. This shows how the companies that have avoided dealing with business ethics has suffered serious backlash from the public, not to mention consequential damage to the company’s image and name, which for most has worked for years to build.

To this day, many businesses involved fail to do its part in contributing to lessen the damage, and setting a good example for business ethics. This makes the views of R. Edward Freeman, on how a business that is not a good citizen in their community, does not pay attention to the quality of life of the people in the community, and fails to adopt corporate responsibility is a business that is soon to be regulated in decline, stand out even more. 

Though profit is important for businesses, without other crucial factors that make the business fair and ethical for all stakeholders, the business will not strive. We can not forgo neither profit nor ethics in a business, however, a specific balance is needed in order to help the business develop. Major global corporations, especially, need to set a good example of business ethics for both our economy and society to grow.

References:

“Dhaka collapse toll passes 1,000.” BBC News. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2014. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-22476774>.

Hildebrandt, Amber. “Bangladesh’s Rana Plaza factory collapse spurs change, finger-pointing.”CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 24 Apr. 2014. Web. 11 Sept. 2014. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/bangladesh-s-rana-plaza-factory-collapse-spurs-change-finger-pointing-1.2619524>.

“What is Stakeholder Theory? – R. Edward Freeman.” YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/embed/bIRUaLcvPe8>.

Picture Top: http://www.cultivatingculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/bangladesh-factory-collapse.jpeg

Picture Bottom: http://www.ethicalpractice.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Success_vs_Ethics_image_lr.jpg