In Esteban Flores blog titled “Industrial robotics paving the way to the future” we can observe a perfect explanation of what is happening in the world nowadays. Improvements in Science and Technology has continuously made business operations and personal life easier and more productive.

Indeed apart from having the advantage of producing in different locations or reducing costs there are a lot of advantages which were not highlighted like the ability to create greater economies of scale, increase efficiency in productivity and certainly not having to deal with a labor force demanding higher salaries, problem solving and motivation techniques. Lets be realistic which firm doesn’t want all these advantages to reach them, every single one of them. But at the same time its nearly impossible for technology to completely take over human labor.

First of all because I agree if this were to happen the amount of unemployment in the world would become ridiculous, by this means if there is no work there’s no money flowing in the economy and at the end there will not be potential customers for the job machinery will be doing, there will be no point. Aswell all the problems that come along with unemployment such as violence that can arise are a drawback to this practice’s. But this does not only bring macro economic disadvantages, in addition to what is presented on the blog we know that machinery is really expensive and the flexibility of the business in terms of changes in demand will be really inflexible.

By this means a true balance of Labor and Capital would benefit the business and the economic environment.

Bibliography:

Industrial robotics paving the way for ‘factory of the future’

Flores, Esteban. “Esteban Flores’ Blog.” Esteban Flores Blog. N.p., 11 Nov. 2014. Web. 12 Nov. 2014.

I found your blog post pretty interesting indeed the first thing that caught my attention in your blog post is how you state that Taylor Swift actually is the one who post on all the mentioned social networks including Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Tumblr. Actually I think this is only partially true because as you may know this kind of artists tend to have a lot of assistants helping and assessing anything going into the media. Lets remember that a whole lot of scandals can and have appeared so they got to be careful.

As it goes for the sales of the actual actor or singer it is really to target all these young audiences and bombard them with all these massive marketing but there is a downside to this practise. Facebook isn’t really an above the line marketing technique because as it was recently published Google and them paired up and each advert you see is actually based personally on every search you’ve made. So basically yes there is very good marketing done by all this artists and search engines but up to what point does this interfere with natural consumer activity? No wonder why there is over consumerism in most of the countries in the world. Is this turn out to be socially responsible? Should businesses really use these techniques to increase our worlds consumption which is already growing in an exponential way.

But definitively it is a very good business strategy to decrease the costs and at exactly the same time increase the attractiveness and reaching of the popularity of any given artist.

Bibliography:

Taylor Swift Using Business Strategies

Ma, Alicia. “Alicia’s Blog.” Alicias Blog. N.p., 04 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.

Global warming, Carbon footprint and the UN millennium goals are just a few of the many trending topics in this century, it seems that anything that has some relationship to the society and the environment gains popularity in the speed of an eye blink. Not saying that this is bad, certainly all the opposite as now more and more people are being educated and particular areas such as educational institutions and businesses are getting more and more involved but the question is up to what extent is this focused on being socially responsible?

Indeed many Multinationals corporations like Coca-Cola company, Kraft, Boeing and many others have the advantage to have financial and strategic possibilities on investing so that their operations are more socially and ecologically friendly. I used the word investing because it turns out not to be an expense in the sense that not only the government and its policies but also customers are interested and many times they base their decisions on this. With that being said it is obvious that small companies will want to do their bit as well even if it is recycling paper because this will maybe not attract the attention as big companies do but at least they can be at the social expected level.

However this taking measures such as holding conferences instead of actually traveling for a meeting can be risky in several ways. With my family business which is located in several countries in Central America I have had this experience and it is definitively not the same holding a conference and going to the actual location, there are so many differences and details that can be hidden or changed. So small firms or any firm actually has to be really careful when cutting cost or activities just to boost its social responsibility.

Bibliography:

http://www.theguardian.com/small-business-network/powwownow-partner-zone/2014/oct/24/corporate-social-responsibility-whats-your-call

Powowownow. “Corporate Social Responsability – Whats Your Call?” The Guardian. N.p., n.d. Web.

The world is based on exchange just as the economic theory suggest  we have various needs and wants. A very well known place for this exchange is financial markets, more specifically the stock exchange. Indeed last year at a total of 16.613 trillion u.s. dollars (Largest in the world), and although this instead of being dynamic and diverse in terms of people interacting just as Aaron Elstein suggests in his blog its completely opposite to this idea.

It is really interesting to have read this blog and reflect on one of our Comm 101 Lectures where three members of the Portfolio Management Foundation came to expose what they were doing in this selective Bcom program. To my personal point of view they successfully explained everything ranging from the very basics of difference between stocks to how they assessed a public company. But the most interesting part that they all three were women, women who knew what they were talking about, knew all the risks and opportunities of markets, indeed knew it all.

According to the blog this is an anomaly because the world largest financial market and by this means lets assume most of financial markets in the world are commanded by males. With this being said I became shocked that even in these types of modern financial institutions, where people with high levels of education maybe graduating from Ivy League Schools were still practising gender inequality. Come on why should we not trust our finance to women? Is it because of birth and child related issues? or is it that they don’t really have the leadership skills including areas such as sensitivity to certain issues?

I became really interested on this issue and found the following video on Youtube….https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NG4JR38pKX4

Bibliography:

Eilstein, Aaron. “Fewer Women Work on Wall Street.” Latest from Crains New York Business. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20141110/BLOGS02/141119990/fewer-women-work-on-wall-street

Certainly the increase in external pressures upon any firm such as competition or a declining demand for its products suggests that something needs to be done as quick as possible so that a counterattack could be possible. This is certainly when disruptive innovation comes into action, and as it can be seen in the article Britannia industries will employ it on its biscuits and their distribution. Indeed important as they account a total of 85% for the business earnings.

It is also very important to highlight that Britannia Industries before doing or developing any business strategy such as innovation, they had to make sure that what they had and what they were employing their resources at the moment was not a factor of concern. This is why being aware of costs became not a big part of the task but an important one because by this means their target or strategy would be better acquired or developed. When this was set in place it comes what really made the drastic change from 20% decline to 7% and what is believed is going to turn the numbers positive.

Disruptive innovation, it was essential after years of providing the customers with the same exact product with no or little changes. It is very interesting that just as Britannia Industries most of the big firms do not invest the sufficient on research and development with the excuse that their product won’t go away quickly because there is no close substitute or an actual existing and dangerous competition to it, and they only take action when these pressures actually get them. Returning to topic the changes not in brands but actual products will make customers want to try them, experience their different design and tastes compare to those of the competition. Essentially this plus the modifications in channels of distributions now reaching rural areas that were not reached before.

Essentially as everything else there are some drawbacks like the fact that the expected big profits from this new innovations will not come that fast but instead take more time as new markets and customers are being experimented.

Bibliography:

Buhshan, Ratna, and Chaitali Chakravarty. “We Have a New Culture of Competitiveness Now: Varun Berry, Britannia Industries.” The Economic Times. N.p., 2 June 2014. Web. 22 Oct. 2014.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-06-02/news/50272484_1_britannia-industries-varun-berry-vinita-bali 

A business organization is much more than something which can be controlled by simple methodology or techniques, much more than only internal factors. Indeed it is something which is always unstable and changing as not only internal but also external create and impact; being political, environmental, social or even technological. First nations is an example of a social implication for companies.

It is interesting to see first of all how the government of Canada defends and protects the right and land of the first nation people. In fact this is very good because if not for certain companies would not care for the social cost and only the profits generated, meaning that not only their land will be taken but as well their resources such as logs and also some sort of income they could have made out of the resources. This is not the worst part as it is very likely that these companies create some form of pollution; air, lakes or even sound pollution. By this means the government is doing a good job not only protecting them but also caring for the environment which also means there will no need for them to make an investment to repair damage caused by firms.

In the other hand it may be that this same government not thinking upon the efficiency at which the Canada resources are being used because being realistic a society with the advantages of education and technology will do far better in managing resources and certainly this is not very likely to be found in indians. Companies which could have had employed natural resources and people are being restricted and by then cannot carry out operations as effectively. For example if a business wanted to do something involving something of this it will create a big weight on its threats side.

In conclusion I would certainly agree that there has to be a balanced government involvement in respect to the First Nations people, resources and private companies so that resources are not exploited but well used, the environment is taken into account and so that both sides don’t get so much restriction.

Bibliography:

Montpetit, Isabelle. “Background: The Indian Act.” CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 14 July 2011. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/background-the-indian-act-1.1056988

I dont know why humanity has been so ignorant upon equality and equity among ourselves. There has been distinctions about almost everything races, income, what music do you listen to or even which gender you are born with and the worst part is that you find it everywhere from home to school, university and even in the workplace.

If women are being discouraged at a university its no surprise why most people involved in business are men, why most of the CEOs, CFOs…ect are men. I am not saying this is completely wrong as it is true that more often men have stronger personality and less feelings (things often needed in the business world) but indeed there are a lot of drawbacks to it. Decisions are made almost entirely by men because if women were not given the chance to speak in a university lecture I don’t think their opinion would be taken into account as if it was coming from a man. It is also important to highlight that due to the characteristic of men being interested in sex a lot of workplaces report high percentages of sexual harassment.

By this means we have not only loss the ideas, innovation and what not women can bring onto the table just because of inequalities since university. Aswell I truly believe that women have the same capacity as men of becoming CEOs or be placed in managerial positions when. It will be really interesting to see how the numbers of sex discrimination and harassment change.

Bibliography:

Kantor, Jodi. “Harvard Business School Case Study: Gender Equity.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Sept. 2013. Web. 08 Oct. 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/education/harvard-case-study-gender-equity.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

“Draw the curtain, the fraud is over” were some words of Francois Rabelais that completely describe what recently happened to Tesco PLC, a grocery and general merchandise retailer multinational with headquarters in Great Britain. Indeed the fraud is over but the questioning not only to the chief executives but everyone involved just begin, which was the motif for this to happen?

Basically although there will be investigations taking place, the reasons for all this is very straight forward as it is not the first time that happening and it will certainly not be the last time. First of all it is known that managerial positions are often motivated to work better by salary increases based on the increase in profit generated and certainly in present economic situation employees from the chief executive to the sales assistant want higher salaries. By this means when the possibility there is no doubt that someone would want to take advantage, each and every time we see this happening and as these occurs we question if in reality there is such thing as business ethics. It is also important to highlight that this is a public limited company and by this means managers would also want it to seem attractive so that investors put their money into it, which in the end they might just end up stealing like it happened some years ago with enron in the United States.

No matter which was the motif for this to happen a fraud is never going to be justified although as always there is common lie invented such as saying that they were only taking it as a loan, even more when it affect a whole chain of people including subordinate employees.

Bibliography:

“Tesco Accounting Questioned by Sainsbury’s.” The Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 01 Oct. 2014. Web. 09 Oct. 2014.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/tsco/11132545/Tesco-accounting-questioned-by-Sainsburys.html

Certainly being a big firm; having large amounts of customers, economies of scale and market power is something that seems really good and attractive for anyone. However there is a problem to being “big”, businesses in some sense tend to accommodate and do not put enough effort to satisfy their customers with new advancements, expansions or what so ever. A perfect example of this is The Coca-Cola Company which as a result got affected with decreased sales and by then revenue.

Indeed it is nearly impossible to imagine how a firm that has been in the world-market for so many years, attracted so many customers will have a downshift in the amount of sales. So what could have gone wrong? What is the reason behind the drop? Is it that Coca-Cola finally reaching the decline phase in its product life cycle? Could it be that internally something was not done correctly? Could it be that the distribution channels were not longer working? Could it be that the market already needed a new beverage following up Coca-Cola Zero and Diet in order to increase their product line? or Could it be that generally society was having an incline toward healthier beverages?

In this situation is is very interesting to find out that the solution these marketing personnel had basically derived the reason to why sales went badly. Coca-Cola needed some sort of innovation, something else than advertisements, public appearances in world events or some of their selling techniques that would increase their sales. These amazing thinkers came out with the idea not only to change the packaging of their cans and bottles but also to involve their audience in it. The results are amazing because not only they managed to increase their sales but they also got the market even more attracted onto them, they built a deeper connection with their customers and this is what added the value to the bottle of Coca-Cola. It was not a new flavour or additional liters, it is the fact that your name or someone elses name was involve who added the value and the willingness to consume.

The lesson here is  that if a business wants to do well and be in the market for a long time it has to go beyond numbers and the “box”, and being realistic if a monstruos firm like Coca-Cola needs it is for certain that other firms will need it.

Bibliography:

“This Clever Marketing Campaign Reversed Coke’s 11-Year Decline in Soda Sales.” Entrepreneur. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2014.

http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/237905

Nike is by far one of the most recognized and branded multinational corporation around the world. Lets be realistic anyone who is economically able to purchase a pair of Nike shoes or any of Nike apparel will do it without any type of doubt because the first things that comes into everyone’s mind are the unbelievable and highly-creative advertisement campaigns featuring the top soccer and basketball players, the extravagant collections ranging from clothes to equipment but definitively not all the abnormal activities that happen underground at the production stage.

Using military strengths to motivate, not paying the minimum wage and treating the labor force as dogs and pigs are definitively the underground decisions that have not been guided by morale principles. As for this Nike’s brand reputation is put into doubt. How can a company making  $24 billion dollars of revenue a year act in this unethical manner? Indeed it is true that not a single firm wants higher costs but come on Nike is already diminishing its costs by producing in developing countries where labor is not only cheap but also unprotected. Although having to pay higher salaries is turning into an ethical dilemma for Nike it is absurd use violence as a form of motivation when other legal ways could be used to make workforce more productive.

This is not the worst part because although they have done this a repeated number of times not only in Indonesia but other countries around the world they still have a perfect corporate image and customer loyalty. Could this mean that ethical behavior is not really needed or easily replaced by business techniques such as marketing? Is this why governments must come into hand because businesses only drive themselves by profit maximization and not social responsibility?

Bibliography

Kavoussi, Bonnie. “Nike Factory In Indonesia Used Military To Intimidate Workers Into Giving Up Pay: Report.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 Sept. 2014.