Author Archives: LeLin

By definition, social enterprises are led by social entrepreneurs who are determined to interrupt the status-quo of the current world and bring positive changes to the well-being of others through the operation of its enterprise or foundation, whereas the United Nations is an international organization that is ‘committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights.’

A reason of the United Nations and social enterprise’s co-existence is the difference between their scope. The United Nation is an international organization among nations, therefore it focus on issue that has been raised to the national or even global level, such as peace-keeping in war-torn areas and poverty-preventing in underdeveloped countries. On the other hand, social enterprise are focus to serve the mass on a smaller scope. Being an enterprise, it focus on solving the problem of a firm, a small group of individuals or even just an individual, such as financial aids to a firm or individual, or health check of a small village. 

The United Nations also differs with social enterprise from the focal areas of their service. The United Nations is the ultimate conductor of the globe. Its services cover the majority of problems human beings are currently facing. It has many branches of sub-organizations such as UNICEF and UN Peacekeeping, which focus on individual areas of the entire service coverage. Different from the UN, most social enterprise focus on providing one type of service thoroughly and professional. For example, Dr. Mohammad Yunus has been providing micro-finance to underprivileged peasants living in rural areas of Bangladesh since 1976, which enabled millions of them to escape from the vicious cycle of poverty.

Overall, even though both have a common goal towards improving the well-being of the current generation and creating a better world for future generations of humans, social enterprise hold significant differences from the United Nations. We need the United Nations to act as a coordinator of all nations and solve large scaled problems that affect nations of even the globe. Whereas we need social enterprise, one similar to the Arc initiate, to go into the roots of a society, detect and take initiative to solve problem at a level where it is closer to the life of individual but unreachable from the UN’s level of operation.

In Annice Chang’s blog, she commented on the article from The Globe and Mail and suggested the Wantering to focus on their marketing structure to achieve cultural coherence on operation.  While my agreement lies with Annice’s view on the importance of a thorough understanding on their marketing structure, I would also recommend the firm to slow its pace of development and have a more steady progress of expansion than the current one.

Wantering was launched in late 2011 by Matt Friesen and several other co-founders. It has made a significant expansion in mere three years. It achieved an audience of nearly one million, it acquired a LA-based fashion social network called StyledOn and it opened two branch offices in New York and Los Angeles. However, such development can cause potentially risky problems. Given the size of Wantering’s business, it is incongruent that the company merely has fourteen employees in total. Although the number is small, Wantering is still struggling to reach a common company culture since they are spread across the continent where seven are in the headquarter in Vancouver, four in New York and two in Los Angeles. What’s more, Wantering is suffering incoherence due to not only geographical diversity, but also clashes between enterprise cultures due to its acquisition of StyledOn. “Merging two completely discrete teams into one cohesive unit takes some challenges,” Mr. Friesen says. “It’s further exacerbated by the fact that we’re all in so many different locations.”

(source: blogs.sas.com)

A diversity in corporate culture benefits Wantering with a global outlook of fashion design and enables Wantering to take the lead in its market with international outreach on newest fashion trends of different geographical locations, however it appears to be too soon and costly for Wantering to enter this stage as a start-up company with only three years of market experience. Instead of going global in this early stage, I recommend Wantering to focus on the Vancouver market at this moment since it is where its headquarters is located. Even though a cultural diversity is important for a fashion company, it is also essential to emphasize on a clear and strong enterprise culture. This culture can not be gained through a diverse office locations, but only raised by a consistent implementation of its corporate spirit. After reaching a coherence on the enterprise culture, it can then bring geographical and cultural diversity with expansion of the firm to further strength the existing common corporate spirit among different branches.

We were honoured to have three Sauder alumni in this week’s lecture to share with us their stories and experience of starting their own business. Among all three, the most interesting story to me was Paul Davidescu with his company Tangoo. 

Paul Davidescu’s Tangoo is an app that serves as a pocket concierge to any users. It suggests a list of perfect dining places tailored to the user by understanding his mood and occasion. This business really caught me eyes as I personally hold a strong interest to the technology industry. Through his story-telling, I learnt many insights to this potential option of my future career that I was highly anticipated of. 

Firstly, he emphasized on the importance of being unique in this business. With the fast development of technology nowadays, the number of apps in any app store is growing rapidly. It is important to catch users and be outstanding from the massive pool of apps. Tangoo, despite being a startup, achieved so with its unique functionality. It it the first app that serves as a personal outing planning tool, hence many users seek out to the entire app store but find only Tangoo. The uniqueness in functionality is able to create a niche market for Tangoo, thus allowing it to focus on a group of users with specific desires and creating a profit.

Secondly, understanding the consumer behaviour in the market is another key to success. It was crucial for Paul to notice a desire of an outing assistant, however, it was more important to have a thorough analysis on the mobile application market and discover a broad market demand for such product. After initiating the idea of Tangoo, Paul also understood that ‘once a user finds a satisfactory app that exactly matches his need, he will be reluctant to switch’. This resulted into an almost one-year-long period of design and refining of Tangoo. Therefore, when it was finally released in the store earlier this year, it was able to soon reach a high user satisfaction rate due to the flawlessness of its initial product.

Lastly, he expressed his understanding on specialization of a mobile application. Paul suggested that specialization is important for a mobile application because ‘people tend to use one app for one purpose only’. Tangoo serves only one purpose — outing planning, but it does the job well. Although he later on revealed a plan of establishing a platform of multi-functional softwares in the future, Paul still emphasized on the importance of specializing on one function during the initial stage of an application. He believes a clearer purpose helps to build a stronger brand image and propose a more direct value to users.

In Shira Ovide’s blog entry from the Wall Street Journal, she shared her views of Microsoft’s choice of giving away its Office 365 mobile apps for free. I found myself in agreement with many of her points, and I would also like to explain my thoughts on this important strategic move of Microsoft.

(source: www.powerobjects.com)

Microsoft recently announced that it will provide the new Office 365 app for free all both iOS and Android platforms. It is a bold move considering Microsoft’s supreme position in office softwares since its groundbreaking first Microsoft Office set. Before this announcement, users are required to pay an annual subscribing fee, starting at $70, to obtain full access to Microsoft’s latest office software. With a recently announced and still increasing number of seven million users, sales of the Office 365 signifies a large sector of Microsoft’s revenue from software retailing.

Although appears to be questionable on the surface, Microsoft’s decision is more understandable when scrutinized from the company’s shift in strategy. This change underscores new-assigned CEO Satya Nadella’s focus on market expansion rather than mere profit maximization. Unlike the past period of Microsoft’s dominance in the market of office software, competition rapidly increased with the emergence of softwares such as Evernote, Apple’s Pages, Numbers and Keynote app, and Google’s Docs and Sheets. These alternatives feature similar functionality but offer much more cheaper prices than Microsoft’s Office 365. Furthermore, disruptive innovators like Evernote popularized a trend of price differentiation in the office software market. Most office softwares began to provide fundamental users a standard version of the software for free, but require paid subscription for premium features. These changes in the market pushes Microsoft to react with a more strategic transformation to maintain its high number of users.

With the increasing popularity of mobile working, the free offer of Office 365 on mobile platforms shows that Microsoft is not bowing to competition.It is a decision resulted from accurate analysis of external opportunities and threats in the business, and it shows Microsoft’s clear dedication towards regaining its once sovereign market position in office softwares. In the words of John Case, a corporate vice president for Microsoft Office, “It’s becoming clearer to us, to continue to be the best paid solution, it’s also important to be the best free solution.”

On October 25, 2014, Rahimafrooz Renewable Energy Ltd., the largest energy and battery provider in Bangladesh, was awarded with the Green Business title by the Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MCCI) of Bangladesh. Only 20 companies in the country were awarded with MCCI’s Centenary Awards for significant contribution to the society. Being one of them, Rahimafrooz Renewable Energy Ltd. has been a consistent leader, possibly the largest private sector investor, of providing sustainable alternative energy resource to households in Bangladesh. Started as the first company of covering green energy in the country, they have served in the industry for 25 years so far with successfully provided more than 25 MW solar Photovoltaic solutions. 

Mr. Feroz Rahim accepting the award
(source: www.observerbd.com)

Rahimafrooz exemplifies the perfect implementation of the Triple Bottom Line. In the underdeveloped environment, it is especially important for a firm to be able to positively contribute to its surrounding community through projects that achieve towards a common welfare of people. According to the Ashden, nearly 70% of households in Bangladesh are not covered by electricity. To overcome this problem, Rahimafrooz successfully initiated the Rural Electrification and Renewable Energy Development Project and brought the benefit of electric lighting, charging and radio to at least 200,000 households in rural areas of Bangladesh. Along with the benefit of Nobel Prize winner Dr. Muhammad Yunus’s micro-finance, such achievement has been ground-breaking to the welfare improvement of people with low income in rural areas of Bangladesh. Rural population now enjoy a much easier life with accessible electricity and payable debt to pull themselves out of poverty. The average life quality of the rural populations has become significantly better, and Rahimafrooz promised to bring sustainability and efficiency in overall energy generation and distribution.

The Triple Bottom Line
(source: www.chess-llc.com)

In the CEO Mr. Feroz Rahim’s own words, ‘businesses should fulfill both environmental and social responsibility besides making profit.’ Rahimafrooz Renewable Energy Ltd.’s business model clearly illustrates the practicality and effectiveness in today’s market, especially the one of the under-developed society. It proves that profitability and sustainability are not always an ‘either-or’ option to a firm. A sustainable business aims at connecting people, the planet and profit can always make a profit through contributing to its users and its surroundings.

After reading Yixin Song’s blog ‘Student debt: Knowledge vs. Poverty’, I found myself in a deep thinking stage. I am in agreement with most of her statements, however, there are also points where I would like to suggest an alternative way of thinking.

I agree with Yixin Song from the perspective of a student. Being a student with no source of income and whose entire life expense is dependent upon my family, I always feel the already-expensive tuition fee burdens my family and the increasing fee will exacerbate on the financial pressure. If the international student fee and residence fee are determined to increase by respectively 10% and 20% next year, many international students, including myself, will find it difficult to manage. Hence, we can consider ourselves as business entities and make value judgements upon the worthiness of paying more than before to receive a exceptional quality of education, which is exactly the same as making an investment now to possibly benefit ourselves in the future. 

However, since students’ way of thinking can be understood through a business concept, then we might change our view to a different stakeholder’s perspective to understand the university’s decision. Despite the university’s constant re-emphasis on the its ultimate goal of providing the best education to future generations, it still behaves like a firm with its business-like operations. It must consider gaining revenue from students to cover multiple costs such as staff, construction and maintenance; it must consider competition with both domestic and international universities; meanwhile it must also constantly improve on the quality of education and depth of research year by year. The board of administration explains that this grand increase in both fees is due to a serious increase in research and construction costs of the school facilities, and the university is behind its competitors in international tuition fee already. Although always putting themselves under the title of unprofitable, the board must execute strategies to make sure the university is at least not making a loss. This in-turn brings a reasonable explanation on the school’s perspective of increasing fees.

In conclusion, the argument falls onto the difference of the student’s perspective and the university’s perspective. The student must consider a balance between the investment for a better future and increased financial pressure in the present. Similarly, the university also needs to find a balance between an affordable education for students and a solution to cover increasing costs. Consensus is a must to solve this issue.

On June 2, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada puts Enbridge back under Canada’s spotlight by declearing that the Tsilhqot’in First Nation held a valid aboriginal title over an area of 1750 square kilometer in central B.C. This landmark decision brings Enbridge’s project into a more difficult situation.

It has not been easy for Enbridge to achieve what they already have so far, and the main element that hinders their progress in the Northern Gateway Pipeline project is the voice of objection from the First Nations. Commencing from Northern Alberta, through Norther British Columbia, and eventually to the deep-water port of Kitimat B.C., the pipeline will cross through habitats of 40 First Nations along the way, hence putting many of their life-dependent and spiritually beloved ecological treasures in threat. It isn’t a surprise that many of these aboriginal groups, including the Yinka Dene Alliance—a group of six First nations, now raise protests to adamantly oppose Enbridge from destroying their motherland.

However, what Enbridge did not foresee is a strong uprising trend of protecting rights of the aboriginal culture and society. Even though the initial stages of negotiation progressed smoothly as they made equity sharing agreements with 26 of the 40 First Nations and the project was approved by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government in June, the decision made by the Supreme Court of Canada brought Enbridge back to the status quo it started with. No other words can be more accurate than B.C. Premier Christy Clark’s “new fork in road” to describe Enbridge and the government’s frustration on this thorny issue in relation with the First Nations.

This 7.9 billion worth project is not only profitable in Canada, but also from abroad. The huge demand from the local as well as  Asian and European oil markets makes this project a profit attractive one and puts on strong market forces to make Enbridge take actions. However, this battle of ethic and profit does not have a forecastable result. In Premier Christy Clark’s words, “we’re not where we need to be yet.”

Works Cited:

Hoekstra, Gordon. “‘There Will Be No Pipeline'” The Vancouver Sun. Vancouver Sun, 16 Aug. 2014. Web. 5 Oct. 2014.

“Overview of the Northern Gateway Pipeline.” Project Overview. Northern Gateway, n.d. Web. 05 Oct. 2014.

Pynn, Larry. “B.C. Premier Urges Cooperation, Not More Litigation, as Government and Natives Reach ‘new Fork in Road'”Www.vancouversun.com. Vancouver Sun, 12 Sept. 2014. Web. 05 Oct. 2014.

What is ‘Bendgate’? It is firstly created by a Youtube producer called Lewis Hilsenteger (a.k.a. Unbox Therapy) where he showed an iPhone 6 Plus can be bent with bare hands, and it soon spread via various social networks and became a world-trending topic. Bent iPhones soon occupied a dominant space on the media and this movement of showing bent iPhones on social medias was given the name ‘Bendgate’.

Apple’s iPhone, being the leader of the smartphone market, is known for its elegant design, stable performance and constant high-quality. This enables it to dominate with a huge portion of market shares, and leaving other smartphone brands, such as Samsung or LG, to exert themselves to compete for only a small portion of the rest. With Ries and Trouts’ analysis of value proposition, It is natural that these brands are not satisfied with their current brand positions, hence they seek for opportunities to reposition their brand. To do so, a company can reposition the brand value of its competitor (the leader) and propose to costumers a new brand image or their own. The effort of repositioning is described as the battle of information in consumers minds, and this is exactly what ‘Bendgate’ is all about.

Image credit: ABS-CBN news

Image credit: ABS-CBN News

Image credit: ABS-CBN News

The tweets above are released by Apple’s competitors soon after ‘Bendgate’ became trending. At a glance, these tweets merely bring a laughter to readers as they taunt iPhone’s Bendgate with humorous pictures and captions. However, their strategic use in value proposition is revealed when scrutinized. These tweets does not contain any information of the iPhone, they use the word ‘bend’ and the ‘Bendgate’ hashtag to allow customers subconsciously relate the image to a comparison with the bent iPhone. This avoids covertly advertising for competitors while still achieving the goal of altering competitors’ brand image. Moreover, they each emphasized on a strength of their own that is related to the topic of bending, which converts the weakness exposed of iPhones to a strength of their own products. Samsung and LG both emphasized on the naturally curved design of their products, while HTC proposed the strength of materials of their products.

In this battle of customers minds caused by information overload, iPhone’s Bendgate gives its competitors a great opportunity to lower customer’s perception of Apple’s brand image, and strength’s their own brand images to climb up the ladder of brand values. They successfully seized that opportunity and killed two birds with one stone.

Work Cited: “Samsung, Other Brands Troll Apple over #bendgate.” ABS-CBN News. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Oct. 2014.

Source: Reuters

Yesterday, Microsoft finally launched its gaming console, the Xbox One, in mainland China, and became the first major gaming console maker to enter this market with a huge potential. 

This launch is made possible by a change in Chinese policy of gaming consoles in the beginning of this year. In January,  China lifted its 14-year-ban on consoles, exposing its lucrative market to both local and foreign console makers with some control over game contents. Both Microsoft and Sony soon showed their interest, but clearly Microsoft is now ahead of the game.

Source: Gamepur

In other markets, Sony’s PS4 has always dominated the #1 place of consoles as customers have enough information to know that it is selling with a higher specification at a lower price than Microsoft’s Xbox. However, Chinese consumers have less information due to its  prohibition of consoles, and so far the demand of consoles is only met by those sold in black markets. This gap of product information between producers and customers creates a great chance for Microsoft to overcome Sony in sales in the Chinese Market.

This is a typical example of positioning, which as we learnt can be described as ‘the battle for consumers’ minds’. Microsoft now equate itself to the first console in the Chinese market, and heavy advertisements already appears on the media as it tries to use its time-in-advance advantage to occupy Chinese consumers’ minds, which are not yet overloaded or influenced by its competitors, thus to create the perception of Microsoft being a leader in the Chinese console market.

Work Cited:  “Microsoft Beats Sony to China Launch.” BBC News. N.p., 29 Sept. 2014. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

Link: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29410358

Image credit: Forbes

It is a traditional belief that business and ethics do not go together. They have always been considered as an oxymoron in the study of business as different stakeholders’ desire frequently collide and conflict. However, standing out from this traditional view, R. Edward Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory differentiates itself by reinforcing the coexistence of business and ethics and suggesting that ‘finding where all stakeholders’ interests go together is what makes capitalism tick’. (Freeman, Edward)

The detrimental collapse of the eight-story Rana Plaza factory in Bangladesh last year brought business ethics back into the spotlight. With at least 400 died and more than 1000 injured, this catastrophe soon became a strong argument to support the traditional view. (Disaster at Rana Plaza) The government of Bangladesh was blamed for the rudimental laws on national buildings and many foreign garment firms were condemned for not providing workers with elementary safety indemnification. Their neglect on the wellbeing of the labor thoroughly demonstrates the unethical side of modern business. Low wages, no health insurance for workers, cheap but environmental-irresponsible raw materials and abominable working conditions—all these factors, that aggressively reduce the cost and in-turn bring profit to the firms, are based on unethically lowering the life quality of the labor. Hence, this tragedy deepens people’s belief on ‘business and ethics cannot go together’.

Image Credit: Business Case Studies

However, a new perspective of business thinking, led by Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory, is created when the effects of this tragedy on all stakeholders are examined. Following Freeman’s idea, this business is pre-determined to fail due to its imbalanced consideration of shareholders’ profits and stakeholders’ needs. Albeit profit is maximized, demand of employees, suppliers, customers, governments and the community are not satisfied. Quoting Freeman, ‘if you just focus on financiers, you miss what makes capitalism tick.’(Freeman, Edward) The situation would completely alter if the garment firms aimed to find a common interest of stakeholders. Employees could have had better working conditions so this accident would have been prevented. More environmental-friendly raw materials could have been used so suppliers could have supplied more without problems considering the environmental responsibility and the community could have been more satisfied. Consumers could have paid more, but knowing the product has a better quality with less exploitation of the labor. Financiers could have invested more to ensure the need of stakeholders, but knowing more revenue is earned from the increasing sells of their products with better quality. When all stakeholders’ needs are satisfied, business ethics will be fulfilled in the process.

Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory, in my opinion, is optimistic and difficult to achieve, but possible and feasible. Concluding with another Freeman’s quote, ‘If you look to see how interests of stakeholders go in the same direction, you might not find it, but I’m certain you won’t find it if you don’t look.’ (Freeman, Edward)

Works Cited:

Freeman, Edward. “Stakeholder Theory.” YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2014.

“Disaster at Rana Plaza.” The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 04 May 2013. Web. 11 Sept. 2014.