Marcus Leung's Blog

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

The mission and doctrine of the United Nations is in essence facilitating international cooperation in areas such as security, economic trade, global crises, and humanitarian issues. It in itself represents the guiding hand of a cohort of nations, assisting and addressing global issues should they arise. Thus, if this body was fully funded, with “fully” defined as the level of financing to the point where all of the organization’s objectives can be met, then I think that humanitarian issues would be solved to a degree, and global crises would be addressed immediately.

So to address the question of the necessity of the Arc or social enterprise, I believe that there would still be a need for both. A fully funded UN could execute solutions to humanitarian problems, but it wouldn’t be able to provide the specific development that the Arc provides. Moreover, with regards to the fact that the UN is only invested in areas where there is obvious need, I think that social enterprise can still result in a betterment of society; with respect to Freeman’s stakeholder theory, the actions that the UN performs only affect those in third-world countries, but I think that social enterprise also yield some form of impact in developed countries too.

Image source (1) and source (2)

UN gives them the resources, but things like arc give the people the know-how to use it effectively.

Back in September, one of the most anticipated events was the release of Alibaba’s long awaited IPO; prior to its release, critics, skeptics, and analysts pored over the details and various possibilities of how the security would behave once the company became public. To date, the company’s decision to go public has proven every bit as successful as promised.

This success is not unfounded. One of the ways in which analysts value securities is by their corporate structure in relation to company comparables, and according to Stephanie, Alibaba has set itself apart in operations. She discusses how Alibaba’s unique philosophy of not holding inventory, by acting as the medium connecting supplier with consumer, has streamlined processes, allowing it to lower costs of production and mitigate depreciation and inefficiencies.

However, operations isn’t the only area where Alibaba separates itself. Their business model is one where customers are prioritized above employees and shareholders. I find it fascinating that despite being a company of enormous scale, Alibaba’s business model continues to be a point of difference, rather than a point of parity in the online retailing industry. I predict that, with regards to Alibaba’s quick rise to prominence, that the company is quietly setting the industry trend in terms of operational and inventory management.

Alibaba just recently passed a comparable, Walmart, in terms of size of market capitalization. They also use two completely different business models. I guess we know which one’s working better.

Image source (1) and source (2)

It emerged twenty years ago, experienced mass consumerization ten years ago, and today, is one of the hallmarks of the internet’s information-sharing capabilities. What was initially seen as a clever way to transfer information has now become the consumer’s preferred method for accessing live entertainment. In the digital realm, video and music streaming have taken the reins in their respective industries, usurping their traditional counterparts of movie theatres and hard copy music.

After reading the blogs of Jason and Sharon, both of whom delved into the topic of music streaming, I must conclude that there seems to be one overwhelming consensus; even with the huge market potential that online streaming presents, the market’s grossly diverse consumer base makes it difficult for any firm’s value proposition to encompass a sizeable portion of said market. Thus, as Shannon mentions, the possibility of a defined leader emerging within the industry is slight.

However, as Adele’s manager states in Billboard magazine’s article, “streaming is the future,” with internet streaming expected to become ubiquitous in five or so years. If music streaming does indeed become widely adopted by the majorty of internet users, then I think that a firm may be able to grab a sizeable portion of the market purely because of the sheer volume of consumers the internet represents.

Whether that happens or not remains to be seen, but for now, the battle for a grasp on the music streaming industry continues.

Image source (1) and source (2)

When a certain firm is described as disruptive, lean, and agile, and when their culture is said to be innovative and proactive, the typical firm that usually comes to mind is a start-up. This comes with the notion that entrepreneurs and new-business owners are always looking for improvement, where stakes are low, and the company is always about delivering a product to the consumer. But that was so ten years ago.

Today, those same aforementioned corporate qualities and cultures are no longer solely attributed to start-ups, but are slowly becoming an all-too common theme for large, established corporations. According to an article by Forbes, this trend is alive and well, and has taken even the most established business ethos by storm. It mentions how blue-chip companies such as IBM, Unilever, and LG Electronics have all revamped business practices within their respective divisions in order to operate in a more agile manner, effectively creating innovative business solutions.

This new mentality of large companies adopting a start-up mentality really intrigues me. I think that through this cultural pivot in business practice, we’ll start to see more firms acting with quicker, more-streamlined processes. Furthermore, it’s fascinating to consider how the emergence of this mentality today will affect the corporate structures of tomorrow. It seems highly plausible to me that the obsolescent, cumbersome stigma of large businesses will soon become an afterthought to a new hybrid form of company culture and process.

Images source (1) and source (2)

It seems to me that every time someone’s asked for advice on a problem, an unwritten rule comes into effect where they’re essentially expected to become knowledgeable on said issue. And if they don’t know it yet, the sooner the better.

Mark Suster, an entrepreneur turned venture capitalist, touches on this topic in one of his blog posts for “Both Sides of the Table.” In the post he gives business advice to entrepreneurs and venture capitalists alike, though the advice is basically applicable to any field of business. He describes how saying “I don’t know” is often the right answer; he disregards the importance of answers in favour of knowing what questions to ask. Suster recounts how in his own career he felt like he was fooled into thinking he had to know everything, but later realized that real business leaders are ones that can admit that they don’t know everything.

While reading Suster’s post, this concept of “not-knowing” really hit home for me. I feel that in today’s “technology-centric” age, people are placing increasing pressures on themselves to know things they don’t know much about. Suster’s advice of admitting one’s lack of knowledge is extremely relevant, not only with entrepreneurs looking to start-up, but also with students. I think that if students could adopt this open-mindedness, they could learn at a greater depth than they would thinking that they already know-it-all.

Image found here.

For many, the first thing that comes to mind when one hears corporate “sustainability” is eco-friendly technology, clean energy, and environmental protectionism. I too previously held that incorrect assumption. After reflecting on what Tamar shared in class, I realized that not too many people seem to be aware that sustainability can boost a company’s financial, brand, and operational status.

One executive in a high-profile company that shares my thoughts on sustainability is UPS’ VP of Environmental Affairs, Rhonda Clark. In an interview with The Guardian, Clark describes how sustainability and efficiency are paired together when it comes to the company’s operations. She explains that many people in other companies haven’t quite caught on to the fact that sustainability can be integrated into a company’s identity without compromising profitability..

I feel as if today’s corporate community puts great emphasis on “buzzwords”.  In the past, prominent buzzwords, that have now been largely adopted, were “social media” and anything “cloud.” In the same way, “sustainability” has become a fairly common buzzword among business innovators. The fact that an industry leader like UPS has adopted a sustainable business approach is a sign to everyone that the trend of sustainability has arrived. And I feel that given all the attention it has been receiving, that this so-called sustainability movement is here to stay.

It has become an all too recurrent theme. A corporation wants to start a project in Northern British Columbia, but lo and behold, the land is traditionally owned by a First Nations tribe. BC Hydro has been trying to launch its Site C hydroelectric megaproject, but it seems like they still have unresolved issues with their First Nations partners in the area. The proposed project would destroy kilometres of farmland and wildlife habitat. Referencing external stakeholder theory, these indigenous people hold a heavy influence upon the business model of Hydro’s project, and the two sides must make peace before the project can move anywhere.

The approval of the Northern Gateway could result in much of Northern BC looking like this.

Another project which has attracted even larger media and public attention is the Northern Gateway Project by Enbridge, with many skeptics and activists complaining about the path that the oil will have to take to reach the coastline. This is another case of how a corporate organization’s business model can conflict with the interests and wellbeing of external stakeholders, as progress of the project has ceased to a halt while the two sides try to find a point of agreement. The true issue lies rooted in the fact that in past years, large corporations have acted with a blatant disregard for the environment and locals that their projects affect. I believe that if this trend continues, then future projects will only meet greater opposition from external shareholders, by First Nations and activists alike.

Image source

Improved relations could be a sign of bigger things to come between the two neighbours.

Formerly two neighbouring states with a noted disdain for each other,  the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea – better known as North and South Korea – have begun an unexpected series of negotiations amid a state of civil unrest in the North. Just yesterday, it was reported by BBC that the two factions had agreed to resume diplomatic talks, in the wake of a surprise visit by North Korean officials.

As it stands right now, only the people involved actually know what the reopening of negotiations actually means, but given the level of hostility between the neighbouring nations in recent years, the start of constructive communication could prove to be a breakthrough. The start of warmer relations could potentially change the entire economic and financial landscape of that specific Asiatic region. If for whatever reason North Korea decides to loosen its trade barriers with its southern neighbours, or simply open its doors like China back in the 1840s, there would be untold economic and political effects. Suppliers in China, South Korea, and Japan would suddenly gain a new, massive market base upon which they could sell their products. All the talk about what these negotiations signify is simply speculation at this point, but many believe that if things turn for the better, that the Koreas could be heading into very exciting times.

Evans, Stephen. “North and South Korea ‘agree to Talks'” BBC News. N.p., 4 Oct. 2014. Web. 04 Oct. 2014.

Image source (1) & source (2)

Ebola is a virus which has experienced a rampant outbreak in many countries along the West African Coastline, killing thousands and infecting thousands more. Health officials initially informed North Americans that ebola could be contained, but somehow, it still managed to jump the ocean into both Texas and Toronto. When this happened North American authorities told the public not to panic, so being North Americans, they did.

A handful of health experts have indicated that they believe a small outbreak of Ebola in North America is all but inevitable. This slight possibility of an ebola outbreak represents a slew of potential macroeconomic effects that could come forth, affecting the North American market.  The healthy care industry is the most obvious example in this case; a company that successfully launches and  markets a drug for the treatment of the virus will see their share prices increase significantly. However, some susceptible industries, such as the airlines, may also experience a downturn due to the emergence of the disease.  The looming threat of a worldwide epidemic will discourage people from traveling, and thus global human air transportation will experience a gradual decline in activity. It would not come as a surprise if airline shares begin to drop while their healthcare counterparts rise, as the impending threat of ebola grows larger. Worldwide events like ebola always produce macroeconomic effects, and in the financial world, those who can correctly predict the outcome of these trends typically come out on top.

Sources

Diamond, Dan. “Yes, Ebola Is Scary. But It’s Also Beatable. Here’s Why.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 03 Oct. 2014. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.

Image source (1) & source (2)

The threat of an Ebola outbreak looms overhead for many First World Countries.

The NFL is one of America’s professional sports leagues which has come under fire in the past year for questionable moral conduct.

The NFL, America’s beloved sports league, and a league traditionally known for its famously marketable athletes, is now ironically under fire for its image problems. Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, two of the league’s most prominent stars, have both been indefinitely suspended in separate incidents, following the discovery of their respective domestic violence incidents.

In recent years, activist groups ranging from Aboriginal tribes to Women’s Rights Organizations have all made their case as to why in some shape or form, the NFL is not doing an adequate job in maintaining moral and off-field behavioural standards.With public awareness at an all-time high due to the likes of social media and an increasingly connected populace, professional sports entities need to be more cautious than ever regarding their actions on and off the “field.” The NFL’s sponsors have yet to cut their ties, as the NFL is America’s most profitable professional sports entity, but at some point questions of social responsibility will come to surface. The images of professional sports athletes are buy-and-large in a gradual decline, and it may only be a matter of time before image issues translate into issues of profitability.

Sources

Gordon, Jeremy. “The Image Conscious NFL Has an Image Problem.” The Wall Street Journal. The Wall Street Journal, 19 Sept. 2014. Web. 22 Sept. 2014.

Image was also found at the article source.