This article suggests that HR should be eliminated from the boardroom as a factor to business decisions.  This article states that HR should be a process that all managers and employees should be accountable for.  A private HR firm, HR Grapevine, says that HR should be “business-as-usual”, and that “HR is a department that drives company objectives”, not a department which makes business decisions.

I agree with this article because I do believe that HR and personnel should be a process which all entities within a business need to follow.  I believe that in order to achieve optimal business performance, HR and employee satisfaction should not be a factor in external business decisions.

In relation to Class 19 where we examined Zappo’s HR department, they were able to conduct HR in a way that it made employees happy to increase productivity and satisfaction in the main front of the company: customer service.  In this case it was important because that is a major function of the company that allows it to retain customers.  However, in massive manufacturing firms like Boeing, it is important that HR is handled in a way that it can keep employees satisfied but without interfering with the manufacturing process so that profits and costs can be optimized.

Follow

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

We would need the Arc and social enterprise because business is about people and the interactions between people.  The United Nations can offer relief to the general public by providing aid and community protection, but Arc can help the individual by educating and advising entrepreneurs in developing countries to make ethical and socially innovative business decisions.

The United Nations often overlooks the individual, which is the most important part of business and business interactions.  Stimulus packages are not the way to help support the small business owners in countries like Ethiopia and Rwanda, as most of that money will most likely end up in state-run industries rather than small restaurant owners, clothing producers, and artists.  By providing advice from the Arc, we can grow economies from the bottom up, encouraging growth in the business community.  We can build economies ethically and sustainably, eliminating future environmental, ethical, economical, and social disaster that many developed and developing countries face today.

Follow

BlackBerry is now coming out from the ashes and is once again competing for sales in the smart phone industry.  BlackBerry recognizes at 30% of smart phone users view their phones as a tool, rather than an entertainment device.  BlackBerry has stated that they “want to provide an experience that caters to the mobile professional – anyone who relies on their device to do their jobs.”

I view this as the correct marketing strategy for BlackBerry, as a phone for business is what is lacking in the smart phone industry. The competition between Apple OS and Android phones have made it a war to have the most bells and whistles and to have the phone best suited for entertainment features such as games, media, and accessibility.  Because of their strive to make their phones the most futuristic and user-friendly, Apple and Google’s Android have ignored the business community and their desire to have a phone built for business and utility.

However, I do not believe that they will ever regain their 47% market share they had in 2009.  Unless BlackBerry is able to unseat Apple OS or Android as the acceptable smart phone operating system, BlackBerry will not be able to change the consumer’s mind on what a smart phone should be: an entertainment device.

Follow

I came across Jia Wei Liew’s blog post about Red Bull’s lawsuit for false-advertising.  He brought up the idea that Red Bull is responsible for misleading its customers to believe that it can physically benefit and enhance their bodies in order to be like their sports idols.  Jia Wei also claimed that it was unethical to market a product in this fashion.

Firstly, isn’t it the primary goal of marketing to manipulate the consumer to purchase your product?  There is no psychological trick or lying in Red Bull’s marketing plan that promises the customer that they will be a professional athlete, nor is it misleading that Red Bull’s slogan states that “it gives you wings.”  It should be obvious to the general public that the slogan is metaphorical for allowing the customer to achieve higher physical performance – which caffeine can do.

Secondly, I don’t understand how their marketing can be viewed as unethical, as Red Bull is not infringing on any moral, cultural, legal, or environmental codes by presenting a metaphor as the slogan for the company.  If Red Bull is legally responsible for lying about their product giving consumers wings, Coca-Cola should be responsible for promoting vampirism or soul-leeching in their 2001 slogan “Life tastes good.”

http://www.mediaite.com/online/red-bull-settles-lawsuit-for-13m-because-the-drink-doesnt-really-give-you-wings/

Follow

I thought that Felix’s post on the $13 billion cover-up of mortgage fraud was an interesting take on this situation in that he covered ethics, CSR, and legality.

This case brings the credibility of JP Morgan Chase into question, as they were the only bank to post a profit during the 2008 financial crisis.  Was this only achievable through providing faulty mortgages to customers?  I do believe that it was a large part of their success in the past decade, given that Chase was willing to pay off one of their own lawyers to keep quiet.

Chase’s lawyer, Alayne Fleischmann, came out to the public, saying that by participating in “the biggest financial cover-up in history”, she would lose everything, including her license to practice law.  I think that her decision to refuse the $9 billion was a good decision, as the risk of losing the bribe is extremely high in the short- and long-run, whereas doing the right thing would keep her career safe in the short- and long-run.

Like Fleishmann, I do believe that it is extremely important to do at least the legal thing to make profits, but unlike Felix, the moral and ethical issues can be questioned and pushed.

Follow

The proposed megadam Site C that would provide 1,100 kW to Northern British Columbian homes and businesses is opposed by many of the First Nation tribes in the Peace River region.  The dam would cause many problems and infringe on the First Nations’ ceremonial grounds and harm fishing and agriculture 83 km upstream.

Obviously, this is an ethical issue between the Federal & Provincial Government and the First Nations’, so a large portion of stakeholders are being overlooked: the developing companies in Northern BC who need the clean power.  The prospect of oil, forestry, and raw metals is huge in the North, and the First Nation opposition is hurting the potential growth for British Columbia.

However, many of the First Nations’ leaders have suggested that the government take steps to introduce other alternatives to hydroelectric power, such as solar, wind, and geothermal, and that the North does not need the energy capacity yet.  Although the Site C dam’s energy capacity would be 90,000 times the capacity of a single wind turbine, it would make sense to be more environmentally conservative and protect other natural resources and industries.  At this point, there is no indication that industry in the North currently needs Site C, but the opposition certainly causes more debate and stagnates any potential growth that the North could attain.

See the full article at: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/First+Nation+chiefs+stage+Site+showdown/10215965/story.html

Follow

Another personal computer company caves in to the pressure in the computer industry.  Hewlett-Packard has announced that they will be splitting operations into a PC and printers branch and the “more profitable” networking, data storage, and server provider branch.

In my opinion, this was a good business move, facading an exit-strategy.  By splitting, HP does not face the same consequences that it would by just forfeiting the industry all together.  By splitting, HP does not risk total failure if the market demand for its computers and printers disappears all together.

HP felt the pressure from Apple and Microsoft, who have market values of $596 billion and $380 billion as compared to HP’s $66 billion.  This shows that the think-tanks at HP finally listened to its stakeholders and realized their reign in the computers industry is coming to a close.

The computers industry is becoming less and less competitive as we move farther and farther into the 21st Century.  Dell and HP, two strong players who ruled the market less than a decade ago, are now dwarfed by Microsoft and Apple, who now control two very large sectors of the industry.  It almost seemed inevitable that the two largest rivals, Microsoft and Apple, would engage in such a fierce competition that they would unsuspectingly, almost monopolize the computers industry.

Full article at: http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKCN0HU0QY20141005?pageNumber=3&virtualBrandChannel=0

Follow

Media promoter James Andrews brings up a very interesting topic of discussion in his YouTube vlog about the social media site Reddit: that moderators and administrators are against self-promotion of start-up and smaller companies, while supporting and allowing celebrities and large firms promote their causes with no resistance.

My theory as to why celebrity AMAs (ask-me-anythings) are left untouched by moderators is to attract more traffic from internet users who do not usually visit Reddit as a news distributor and social media site.  Big-time celebrities, such as Jay Leto, Stephen Colbert, and even US President Barack Obama, have used Reddit to promote their causes, books, movies, etc.; which violates some of its self-promotion rules.  However, deleting these celebrities’ posts would cause a media-storm, giving Reddit a bad reputation, funneling traffic to other sites, such as tumblr and Pinterest.

But why doesn’t Reddit allow people like James Andrews with his indie-rock promotion site to post their product to users who actually enjoy it?  Does it not make sense for Reddit to maximize internet traffic by not diverting the “little-man” elsewhere?  Reddit has been known in the past few years to be the site to incubate these start-ups, so they should stick to their roots and allow self-promotion.

Follow

In the last few months, the NFL (National Football League) has been plagued with an epidemic of domestic violence among its players.  This post is not to discuss Commissioner Roger Goodell’s actions – or in-actions – but rather the reluctance of major sponsors to drop their investment in the NFL.

PepsiCo and Anheuser-Busch, the two largest corporate sponsors of the NFL, have decided to “monitor” the situation while the league office looks for the solution.  Large companies are yet to see a negative impact on the league’s business, and, to them, see the NFL as stronger than ever.

Thus arises the ethical issue of these major sponsors profiting off of the NFL’s efforts to correctly discipline these few players and increase funding to psychiatric programs for players and their families.  Is it foolish for the sponsors to back out of a long-term commitment to the NFL because of the faults of 5 players? Yes. When this issue goes away – which it will – those companies would find it more expensive to return to their partnerships with the NFL. However, is retaining sponsorship hurting PepsiCo and Anheuser-Busch’s image and reputation?

No.  The faults of a handful of players, a smaller proportion of NFL players in domestic violence cases than the national average, should not affect sales or reputation.  These companies should continue their sponsorship and support the fight to put an end to domestic violence.

Read the full article at: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2014/09/15/nfl-sponsors-pepsico-anheuser-busch-domestic-violence/15679451/

Follow

More than 430 fast-food workers employed at Wendy’s, McDonald’s,  and Burger King were arrested on September 3rd around the United States for blocking streets while protesting the $7.25 federal minimum wage.

Because of other states such as Washington and Oregon  raising their minimum wages above $9 ($9.32 and $9.10, respectively), minimum wage workers have begun to protest the 2007 $7.25 wage.

The main issue with the minimum wage is that – according to the Bureau of Labour Statistics – 75.3 million workers in the US make the minimum wage, which makes up 59.0% of the entire workforce. The ethical issue is that these workers (based on a 40-hour work week) have an average salary of $15,000 / year.  The accepted 2014 poverty line for a household containing two people is $15,730.

So what should our friends in the executive office at McDonald’s do?

Well, since many workers at their restaurants are trying to support themselves and their families, it seems like the ethical decision to raise the minimum wage.  And they should.  But should they raise it directly to $15 dollars, and risk the franchisees investments by doubling their fixed salary costs?

Should McDonald’s be in charge of raising the wage, or should our governments control the wage and how it should be implemented?

Read the full article at: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/09/04/fast-food-restaurants-strike-mcdonalds-wendys-burger-king-taco-bell/15058943/

Follow