This article was especially interesting because of its approach on marketing. The market of Internet based thermostats in a generally new topic with Ecobee and Nest the leaders. However, although they are competing against each other, this competition has the ability to improve each company as a whole because of the discussion it creates. With Google now entering the race, Ecobee promotes their product by reiterating they believe they have the naturally stronger product.

Similar to Tesla, we see a new start up company start a new field in business and then have it swarmed by competitors trying to keep up with, or get in, the race. Both Tesla and Ecobee are the founders of the field, and both have higher prices. Ecobee (it appears) has not done much in terms of advertising and so again we see a comparison to Tesla where they are using social media and word of mouth to spread their product. While other countries are busy promoting and comparing their products to Ecobee, they are actually doing part of the promoting work for their competitors.

The article itself promotes Ecobee by talking about its competition. Before I found it, I had heard of Nest purely because it is a byproduct from Apple, but even though Ecobee is coming out with their third version, I had never heard of it. The power of marketing…

Canadian Press. (2014, October 5). Toronto-based thermostat company Ecobee faces heated competition.CBCnews. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/toronto-based-thermostat-company-ecobee-faces-heated-competition-1.2788317

The selected article revolves around the topics of large companies being pressured by society to raise awareness of corporate social responsibility. The driving thesis of the article is the huge amount of power the public has over corporate super powers because they are easy to lay blame to and demand change. It is common knowledge that in the pursuit of profit, ethics of a company may be skewed slightly for example child slavery. Selecting a strong enough company and creating enough evidence to make a sound argument leads to change because it cannot be ignored.

However, the article continually repeats that it is not so much the company wilfully changing their ways, but more to satisfy the public so as not to hurt their reputation. Is this in itself morally sound though? To take ethical action ‘just because you have to?’ In terms of making a positive change, yes I think it is okay, but to then argue that the change is morally sound when there are alternative motives behind it, that is when I have to disagree. To do so would be a blatant disregard of the morality behind CSR and thus the concept as a whole.

Porter, Michael, and Mark Kramer. “Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility.” Harvard Business Review. 1 Dec. 2006. Web. 11 Sept. 2014. <http://hbr.org/2006/12/strategy-and-society-the-link-between-competitive-advantage-and-corporate-social-responsibility/ar/1>.