When reading the blog post “Top 6 things to tell angry customers”, it is clear that there is a lack of creativity when it comes to Human Resource management. After learning about Zappos and its incredibly successful call center, the “tops tips” provided in this blog post are mediocre and generic in comparison. Clearly simple responses such as “I understand that…” and “What would you consider a good solution for this problem?” (Top 6 things), are too impersonal. Zappos has demonstrated that employees need to dig deeper and connect with their customers on a more personal level in order to maintain loyalty. It is very debatable that only 6 tips should be provided in order to deal with angry customers. As seen in the recording of the Dell call, following a script can often make the customers angrier. It all depends on the situation of the call but usually when a customer is calling out of anger they are calling to feel heard, they are calling for an employee to genuinely care. Those top 6 tips should be reevaluated in order for employees to develop professional relationships with customers as best as they can. Real-life situations can’t be followed with just 6 tips.

http://www.adrianswinscoe.com/top-6-things-to-tell-angry-customers/

” If  the United Nations was fully funded why would we need the Arc or social enterprise”?

The UN is different from Arc Initiative and Social Enterprise in the sense that it helps people on a grander-scale judging their improvements based on groups and not individuals, as well as the benefits achieved through money expended. The UN fulfills the basic needs of humans because that is what the organization was designed for. Much like Maslow’s Hierarchy, they focus on the bottom of the triangle with physiological and security needs, and with maximum funding they would able to achieve this on an even grander scale, which is fantastic. Nevertheless, Arc Initiatve and Social Enterprises dig deeper in between the levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy, say Self-Identity and Actualization. They specialize in focusing on individuals and how to connect social and economic issues together and solve them.

We need social enterprise and Arc Initiative because they inspire people to use commercial strategies to improve people’s lives instead of maximizing profits. People see how the world can be greater benefited from socioeconomics whilst simultaneously achieving this through their passion. Furthermore, Social enterprise applies shared value where the UN will come in to fix a short-term problem, they are not always there to provide lasting values. Social enterprise does. A strong example of this is the clothing line Osei-Duro. The partners whom run the company line started out with a sustainable and ethical business of employing people in Africa to make garments. However after they discovered that the employees found it challenging to keep up with garment standards. So the heads of the company changed their tactics and focused on employee training so they could develop the skills needed to increase profits. However not only did the training increase profit but the act of the leaders taking time to value their employees potential is what shared value is all about.

Arc initiative and Social enterprises are here to stay because they provide an intimacy of social relationships and an understanding of the importance of economic expansion in the world that will last.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-growth/going-global/production-problems-nearly-unravel-high-end-fashion-label/article14286870/

http://www.kaltura.com/index.php/extwidget/preview/partner_id/133362/uiconf_id/16718522/entry_id/0_n71z3tl2/embed/legacy?

http://www.un.org/en/strengtheningtheun/results.shtml

Arguably what Cobie says about Netflix being a disruptive innovator is true, however, I think it all depends on what customer segment you are looking at. As I to am a college student Netflix appeals greatly to me just as it does Cobie: you get a lot for a little. It is stressed that this is the case for a college student. I think, although online streaming is increasing, cable and TV’s are still high in demand. What comes to mind primarily is the customer segment of families. Watching TV is still advertised as the past time that brings families together and enjoy themselves. Especially during cultural events such as the World Cup or Olympics, it can be comforting to know that you are apart of a community. It would seem unorthodox for a large group of people to stand around a computer and cheer. Furthermore companies such as Samsung or LG are always coming up with increasingly innovative ways to reinvent the TV, for example the curved screen, higher pixel numbers and now the TV can even be used for online streaming, and of course there is always the feature that TVs can easily be larger than computer screens. TVs have become part of the culture in some countries and so it is irrational to say that they will come to an end all together. In order to make a successful business, there must be a clearly defined customer segment, Netflix has figured out theirs and is doing very well, if the TV industry can work on appealing to their customers, I’m sure there is no possibility that the industry will be fading out anytime soon.

In Sam’s blog post The Simpson’s Speak Business, she provides a very interesting and entertaining analogy between the Simpson’s and Zappos on Customer loyalty. Based on the examples provided, customer loyalty is clearly achieved through word-of-mouth when a business puts a great effort into developing relationships. Demonstrating the strategy of word-of-mouth in The Simpsons emphasizes how casual and subconscious it is to do, especially when consumers are in close proximity with one another such as in the town of Springfield. When a business means well, people will naturally want to discuss it and support it. This further motivates employees to perform well because they know they are building a community for themselves. This motivation is the kind of organizational culture Zappos provides which is why I would however have to disagree with Sam’s example of the peanut and $20. I feel that her message of Zappos employees choosing a fun work environment over high paying jobs was clear, but then wouldn’t Zappos workers most likely choose the peanut over the $20? I see the picture of Homer Simpson not representing the money that Zappos employees wish they had but as a choice between money and value (the peanut representing the value). So much like Homer Simpson I believe employees are motivated by value over money.

https://connect.ubc.ca/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_55007_1%26url%3D

The startup WeWork was designed to “take out a cut-rate lease on a floor or two of an office building, chops it up into smaller parcels and then charges monthly memberships to startups and small companies that want to work cheek-by-jowl with each other”(Inside the Phenomenal). The reason WeWork has managed to become so successful so quickly is because it is addressing a pain and creating a gain. Beginning in New York, WeWork recognized that the city was one of the centers for business but also was one of the most expensive in real estate pricing and what all startups need is a place to work. Additionally WeWork is not just selling real estate but it is also selling value propositions. Startups are so fond of the places WeWork sells because of the close proximity they will gain with others. Startups being around startups promotes an atmosphere of enthusiasm and innovation where they can run ideas by each other and find inspiration. Much like the company Zappos, WeWork’s organizational behavior creates an environment where workers can come to achieve the goals they’ve set out for their company.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkonrad/2014/11/05/the-rise-of-wework/

Reshma Saujani truly is the embodiment of a social entrepreneur. As an immigrant Indian girl growing up in America, Saujani always had to break through stereotypes and defy the status quo. She finally incorporated this fight into the business world when she began Girls who Code. This program is offered to sophomore and junior girls in high school over the summer where they learn about coding and the technology industry. Through this program Saujani is creating shared value for society and the economy. It is estimated that by “2020 there will be 1.4 million computing jobs in the United States and currently, while American women graduate with 57 percent of all bachelor degrees, they make up only 14 percent of computer science graduates”(Ambitious plan for Technology). The girls who code program will increase employment rates for the future and will also increase gender equality in the industry. Based on many stories girls in the program have told her, Saujani has found at an early age that girls feel discouraged to pursue their passion of technology in a seemingly male dominated field. Girls who code empowers woman and at the same time provides society with skills that can be incorporated into everyday life. Companies such as Google see the shared value in Saujini’s program and have even started to replicate it by creating programs such as Made with Code. It is inspiring to see how fast this phenomenon is catching on. After all a successful community creates a successful industry.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/reshma-saujanis-ambitious-plan-for-technology-1415237831?mod=WSJ_hp_RightTopStories

Taylor Swift’s recently released album “1989” is the first album to have gone platinum album since 2002.

In the digital age, consumers of music have been so accustomed to streaming and downloading, yet Taylor Swift has managed to surpass the digital sales of her album with the physical sales by 647,000 in comparison to 640,000 (Taylor Swift’s ‘1989’ becomes). Most consumers nowadays would choose downloading music over actually stepping outside to buy the physical copy because it is so convenient to do so. Therefore it would seem highly unlikely that Swift would be able to change consumer’s mindsets so drastically. She was able to achieve this advertising her point of difference. Consumers had the preconceived idea of a CD being unnecessary and unpopular in the present, but she shifted their consumer mindset to convincing them that it is beneficial that the product is so unpopular because now owning her physical album would make the, apart of an exclusive movement. Swift also emphasized that her fans should perceive it as a “collector’s edition” as well as providing further incentive with polaroid photographs of herself in each box jacket. Furthermore Swift is one of the few artists to remove herself from Spotify. This is because for every song streamed 70% of the royalties are intended to go to the artist, however they have actually been going to the record label and managers. Fans can now only buy the album online or in the store, no free streaming allowed. By using points of difference and staying true to her value propositions, and shifting her key activities, Swift has changed her revenue streams and continues to increase her profit and popularity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2014/11/05/taylor-swifts-1989-becomes-the-first-platinum-album-of-the-year/?tid=sm_fb

In recent news Republicans have gained control of the U.S. Senate after the midterm elections and it is interesting to see how the technological business tycoons of Silicon Valley have had such an impact on the elections to make this possible. Previously the majority of who were strong supporters of the democratic party have now change their minds. Companies such as Google and NetPAC have used their PACs (Political Action Committees)  to invest $1.6 million into the Republican Party opposed to the Democratic (Why Silicon Valley). After previously being heavily invested in the Democratic party during the 2008 and 2012 elections, it has become clear that not just for the technology industry but in fact many industries will support whoever is most likely to be in power. Companies will advertise areas of concern to the public that align with those of popular candidates in order to liken their chances  of receivng more assistance and progress in their sector. In one way this works as a stakeholder strategy but at the same time clashes with ethos of a companies public perception. As companies take on the world of political spending it shows how strong their businesses are becoming as they are able to have great influence through technology but makes it too easy for them to alternate between parties as one become weak and another gains strength. Their value proposition will not be clear. This creates a challenge for the companies to maintain customer loyalty if they themselves cannot remain loyal to one set of beliefs.

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/silicon-valley-pacs-supporting-republicans