Maggie Meng's Blog

The public sentiments are constantly shifting toward eco-friendly businesses, meaning companies now need serious considerations in decision-makings, strategies, and plannings. Since the realization of the environmental problems, especially the level of green house gases, the public is getting more concerned with a unsustainable environment. This is no less  an opportunity for companies to target a new market segment – eco-friendly. The growing needs for less energy consumption and low waste production allow companies associated with sustainability to grow dramatically. Therefore, the eco-friendly market became a protential benifit for all businesses. Not to mention that a eco-friendly tag also builds more credibility and brand recognitions. Moreover, as the technology advances, the eco-friendly market is getting more competitive. More and more companies realize the importance of sustainability and recognize the potential benifits entering the market.

Visit the following link to see how the trend was developed! 

http://www.sbpractices.com/go-to-whoa

One important issue concerning Lieber Skylight is its shrinking market. Meaning the company is losing their customers to its competitor, Vancouber Skylight. To deal with this problem, Lieber should first ensure its customer loyalty. Lieber has been in control of 70% of the skylight market and this created an opportunity for Vancouver Skylight since there is a lack of competitors. However, due to Lieber’s predominance in the skylight market, it’s also possible for the company to protect its market share and regain their former clients.

Secondly, one advantage the Vancouver Skylight holds is its low price, which also means a lower production costs and possibly weak in its quality. Therefore, Lieber can focus on its skylight quality while trying to minimize its costs. Moreover, Vancouver Skylight also has the advantage in international market, meaning its profits come from both Canadian and American skylight markets. On low urgency concerns, Lieber company should consider extending its market outside US or maybe inside US but not just limited to Seatle and another few provinces. Vancouver Skylight reached out to Seatle because its near the US-Canadian border. It may be risky for the company to reach into US. Therefore, Lieber can find a better market else where in US too.

In today’s society, how many people has never ever used Photoshop or seen a photoshoped picture? That’s a rhetoric question. I believe that people who has access to any media has at least seen a photoshoped picture, whether he or she awares of it or now.

Here’s a video you should watch. But I think most people might have seen it before.

What are the general thoughts after watching the video? I believe there are many.

Photoshop has distorted our perception of beauty, mostly through the media.  Though, it is unavoidable that people will be influenced by media’s view of beauty. However, is it ethical for businesses to use this perception to attract consumers’ attention in order to expand into a larger market? To certain degree, yes, since advertisements often focus on grabbing our attention with dazzling features. However, on the other hand, shouldn’t we consider their actions as an act of deception? Not all products are effective as shown in an advertisement. For example, a cosmetic ad may beautify its spokesperson, but certainly not all its customers. Not to mention that sometimes the promoted product may actually endanger the customer. The best example for this would be a plastic surgery advertisement. No matter how beautiful it can make a person look like, there’s always a risk behind it. However, not all plastic surgeons will genuinely tell you that in case of unsuccessful surgery procedure, there will be risk of distortion or even death.

What I’m trying to say here is not that business should stop using photoshop to make their products or services more attractive and be ethical. My point is that it’s always up to a consumer whether a product or service is worth spending for or not. And whether an advertisement is ethical or not will also be dependent on the consumer’s opinions.

Water Privatization!

To what extend does ethicality still exist when public water supply is being handed over to the private investors ?

Refering to the article, some private investors were raising the prices of water so that they would benifit from this action despite the conditions of the consumers. Example given in Bolivia in 1990’s displayed the negative outcome of leaving the water system in the hand of the private investors. Another examples in Cochabamba, 2000, also underscores the same problem. The outcome in Cochabamba was so outrageous that “the violence shook the confidence of the local government and international investors.”

However, having the private investors controlling parts of the water systems can also help maintaining our community at a high standard. Reason for this is due to governments’ lack of funding for water infrastructure.
While government is cutting short on public water fundings, the existence of private entities provided convinience to the consumers (though the price for this is still too high).

For more detailed information see Privatizing Community Water Supplies Becomes More Common
at:
 http://business-ethics.com/2010/09/11/1306-privatizing-community-water-supplies-becomes-more-common/