Month: November 2011

While reading through the Economist, I found an interesting blogpost that raved about  an app called “Goodguide” designed for comsumer that analyzed company’s values embedded in the product. It was invented by Dara O’Rourke, professsor of environmental and labor policy at University of California, Berkeley when he stumbled a lotion product that he wondered was safe to use. He invented Goodguide 8 years after which allowed the consumers to scan the bar code of an item, and be presented with the information if the firms have a good human rights record. If not, they were suggested other similar products with similar pricing but with better ethical company.

I think this app is brilliant in a way that it has a lot of potential to gain attraction from huge field of consumers. It can range from mothers concerned about her children’s unhealthy diet, to consumers who feel strongly about human rights and ethical producing by the companies. Goodguide is opening up another concept to customers. That they are deserving to know more about the product when making a purchase decision and to even stop a company with bad production methods before they get popular . There are so many marketing fads that trick us in buying products in the media, and though it is successful branding and advertising tactics, I think they should be avoided for mass societal consumption through creations of apps such as Goodguide.

For the article: http://www.economist.com/node/21538763

After reading my classmate Jimena’s blog about Puma as sustainable business, it was unexpected for me to hear that from Puma. Then I thought to myself, why it shocking to hear that from a highly recognized brand? It was because of all the fake, copied items that I’ve seen in multiple places and occasions which had degraded high-brand imaging for the company.

I was in Korea this summer, and I saw a stunning amount of copied Puma products, that were noticeably fake. These are couple of the examples.

I don’t think Puma does enough copyright control of their product to brand their product as high-end products especially in the Asian markets. It has come a point where customers are buying these products as a “joke” because of the obviousness of the product which degrades Puma’s reputation as a company that provides high-end atheletic wear.

I feel like Sustainability regiments are something company’s with successful brand-imaging and customer loyalty would gain from such as Starbucks. Because the quality of their product is assured in customers, sustainable campaigns add as a bonus to attract more customers by stimulating the feeling of deed in supporting a good cause. Puma has yet to gain that from their products alone, and I think that is one of the reasons why their sustainable campaigns are not getting recognized or credited in the fashion market.

I found Conrad’s Blog Posting about the issue of Canadian government imposing a 75% packaging law very interesting in terms of the idea of company’s right in having branding it’s products. I couldn’t agree more with how despite the company’s harmful products to Canadian consumer’s they should be treated with equality as other product companies not equity. However,  It started to make me think about whether the tobacco industry was an ethical industry in the business world. The reason why had such powerful, invincible stance in the field was because their consumers suffered from medical “addiction” towards the product.

Is this ethical?

Can we say that despite it’s stunning revenue and growth of the business, it is an unethical business at the end of the day?

I have noticed the extensive packaging with gruesome pictures of lung cancer and what not on cigarette boxes before and have even asked the regular smokers if the disturbing graphics disturbed them at all. The answer was stunning. The packaging didn’t bother them all! The cigarette smokers were so “hooked” to the product, that they seemed to be at a point where the “product” was what they wanted and branding didn’t matter to them at all.

I think in business perspective, no in doubt is the tobacco industry a successful and influential industry that drives our industry. How they have that consistent customer return and stunning revenue defines them as industry that generates large sums of money. However, I don’t think it is ethical to attain this return through medical addiction. Not only is addiction the problem, but smoking initiates all the critical diseases and conditions in people such as various cancers resulting in death, which affects debt that people collect in the health care systems especially in the US.

Tobacco industry takes a significant portion in the world economy, and there’s no chance that it is going to disappear within time. However, I think it’s important for there to be no more invention of innovation of such product.

Check out Conrad’s Post: https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5116011.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

When you order a hot drink at a normal coffee shop during the cold winter seasons in Vancouver, your cup of coffee is most likely to come with a brown piece of cardboard wrapped around your cup. This ” “Java Jackets” or “Cup Sleeves” was invented by a man named Jay Sorenson in 1991. He was inspired to create such an item when he dropped a cup of hot coffee on his lap because the cup was too hot. Since them Sorenson made his house basement the company headquater, and started to produce the product in his mind. The sleeves sold quickly when he introduced the item to the Annual Seattle coffee trade show and eventually all the coffee chains were demanding his product.

Now, 10 years later, the Sorenson family have sold over 1 billion coffee sleeves making customer’s happy as well as themselves. These Java Jackets can be found in any small coffee stores to big chain stores such as Starbucks or Blenz Coffee, and it’ll continue to be in the hands of the customer’s for a long time.

I consider Java Jacket Company an enterpreneurial company because they have created and marketed something that has never been introduced to the people. Java Sleeves are brilliant yet such simple piece of item that is being put to use in people’s everyday lives, and because of Sorenstein’s connection to his everyday annoyance to the invention of a everyday life product, it was bound to be successful. The product itself is truly an entrepreneurial product, because no one has thought of creaitng the sleeves before Sorenstein. Considering how much success Java Jacket has experience over the course of 10 years, the rapid company growth  and how much impact it has on people’s life, I think Java Jacket is one of the most enterpreneurial companies.

Check out the company: http://www.javajacket.com/

Steve Jobs vision and accomplishments with Apple has set to be the “golden” standard for many business hopefuls. Apple has revolutionized the world market by bringing high-end, efficient technology that has improved the lives of every individual to be convenient. However, before the rise of Apple, the main figure head in the business world was Bill Gates. He was the founder of Microsoft, resigned at 2006 and with his Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation that helps with the world-wide, humanistic issues, he has gained tremendous respect not only as a business man but as a humanist/activist in the world.

Both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs is no doubt a revolutionary figure in the business world. However, I think the difference between the two is that Bill Gates has taken initiative in inproving the world, not just through innovative technology but through investing and spending his monetary values towards a cause. It states in the article that Melinda and Bill Gates foundation has donated over 15 billion dollars towards a worldly cause. That is more than what a sucessful, well known company would be worth.

Steve Jobs have perfected the art of delivering customer-happy products. Apple has ushered the personal computing idea to the customers and his world in undoubtedly a work of genius. I think it is unfortunate that he weren’t able to be around as Bill Gates to give back to the community. He was busy in building his empire Apple to be the top-notched technology company in the world, and never got to experience that position at the top where he could focus more on the worldly causes to gain his reputation not only as a business leader but as an human being with strong ethics and morals.

I think it’s really crucial for a leader, and a large figure-head to genuinely show interest in worldly causes, and really give back to the community. It shows ethics, and morals of the business community, and at the end the day, we all gain and win when everyone is happy.

http://www.businessweek.com/management/idolize-bill-gates-not-steve-jobs-11012011.html

Jersey shore star Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi has brought a new found “Jshore” phenomenon in the media with her ditsy personality and “non-filtered” manners on TV. Well most of us think of her as a reality tv star, we don’t even consider the fact that Snooki is in fact a “business woman.” With no previous business education of noticeable knowledge, with her fame on the show, she has managed to become New York Time’s best seller with her novel “A Shore Thing” and it is reported that her personal appearances and such command a net worth of $20,000. Her Unique style on the show with her standard “bling”, fur and leopard prints have brought lots of attention to it’s viewers, and the company that produces her furry boots recently experienced a web crash when she tweeted about where they could find those items online. With the expected launching of her perfume line as well as a clothing line, Polizzi’s future as a fashion icon looks bright.

Can Snooki really be defined as a successful business woman? As an aspiring business student, it is almost insult to consider her as a successful woman with a  business career. Compare to individuals with professional business education, training and knowledge, she is getting overrated media attentions as well as making significant profit through her products. How can someone who conducts such shallow behavior and controversial attitude who displays zero professionalism become so successful?

I think Snooki is a product of successful branding through the show. It doesn’t necessarily mean “positive” or “high-class” branding, but she has shown herself enough that people are “intrigued” by her lifestyle. She has made people believe that you can attain fame and wealth through shallow behaviors, and by buying her products you can become that kind of individual who don’t have to worry about societal norms. I think Snooki is at her prime time of branding herself with the end of the new season, and she is in fact being very strategic in promoting her products at this period. However, I don’t think she should be defined as a business figure as she is majorly nothing but a temporary product of a show.

Check out the Article: http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/02/smallbusiness/snooki/index.htm?iid=HP_River