Natalie Yu's Blog

After a near-death experience in Brazil, Tal Dehtiar re-evaluated his life and founded his own company Oliberté. A certified Fair Trade factory, Oliberté manufactures footwear out of Ethiopia. A key point of difference separating this company from their competition is the fact that they provide jobs for those in need.

Building upon a previous post, “One for One or One for None”, Dehtiar’s solution is more sustainable than the Tom’s business model. Creating jobs holds greater value than a pair of shoes: footwear gives temporary relief but employment betters a person’s quality of life. Having a career promotes both mental and physical stimulation, in addition to teaching the value of hard work.

Oliberté embraces the phrase, “Trade. Not Aid.” Essentially, Dehtiar does not believe that monetary or material gifts will better a person’s life. And so, by employing safe labour practices, in addition to the company’s use of eco-friendly materials,  Oliberté will achieve success as a sustainable brand.

Sources:

Entrepreneur: This Guy Makes Hipster Shoes in Africa. But Don’t Call Him a Social Entrepreneur

Oliberte: About Us

In 2006, Blake Mycoskie revolutionized the marketing game by starting a movement called “One for One”. The idea behind this campaign is that for every pair of shoes purchased, Toms Shoes will provide a free pair to someone in need.

On the surface, this initiative benefits everyone: Toms increases their sales, as customers buy into the idea of helping the less fortunate while also getting a new pair of shoes. As for the recipients of the free shoes, they are grateful for this unexpected contribution.

However, what happens to small businesses?

Seemingly forgotten in this equation, they are unable to compete with Toms providing the same product for free. Consequently, these businesses are forced to close, as they are not gaining enough profit. This is why the One for One business model is detrimental to the economy. The campaign may have originated with good intentions, but the downsides of the model were not accounted for prior to initiation. This is simply a quick fix for the much larger issue of poverty. However, it has the opposite effect: it is not fixing the issue of poverty, but adding to it by creating a dependency on charity.

In order to truly help, developing countries need more opportunities and not free handouts.

Sources:

HBR: How Social Entrepreneurs Make Change Happen

One for One Business Model

What is Social Entrepreneurship? 

 

As the holiday season draws near, most retailers are incorporating seasonal merchandise into their production to prepare for the festivities. Starbucks is of no exception.

The franchise has become integrated into our society’s culture with their holiday cups marking the start of the festivities. This year, however, is causing quite a commotion due to the cups design..or lack of it for that matter. Simply a plain red cup, some customers claim that the brand is against Christmas and also, Christianity.

These claims are unjustifiable though, as Starbucks has always been providing generic winter themed designs: they do not associate with a specific religion in any form. Although some would argue that this is bad PR for the company, I believe that it will increase their sales. This issue has produced free advertising for the company as customers are sharing photos of the cup either mocking or sharing their opinion on the subject. Starbucks should take advantage of this buzz around their company and continue to utilize their position as a holiday icon.

Sources:

CNN Money: Starbucks Red Cups Through the Years

Huffington Post: Some Christians Are Not Happy About Starbucks’ Holiday Cups

Wall Street Journal: Consumers Aren’t So Cheery about Starbucks’ Holiday Cup Controversy 

 

Once upon a time, in the streets of California, there was a place full of magic: Disneyland. With the imaginative stories from Walt Disney coming to life, adults and children alike flock to the theme park and live out their childhood dreams.

In Help Scout’s blog, they explore the tricks of the trade that have equated to Disney’s success over the decades. One of the contributing factors was Walt’s attention to quality customer service. For example, if a child waits countless hours in line for a ride, only to find out they’re too short, it’s simply too bad. Rather, that’s how other theme parks would respond. At Disneyland, that customer will receive a special pass to bypass the lineup for another ride, thus nullifying the tortuous wait again. This service is simple, yet highly effective as the theme park has a return rate of 70% for first time park goers.

Another tactic used by the founder was testing out the rides for himself. By disguising his appearance, he went on rides as an average customer would. After finishing, he would alter the rides until it met his level of satisfaction.

This care and attention that Walt Disney had for his theme park is displayed with every visit. The amusement park goers not only develop an attachment to the lovable characters and traditions, but also to the creator himself.

Sources:

Help Scout: How Disney Creates Magical Experiences (and a 70% return rate)

Statista: Disneyland Anaheim, California Attendance 2009-2014

In Sharon’s blog post on sustainability, Starbucks was being accused of non-environmentally friendly practices. As a short-term solution, the company set up more recycling bins within their stores. Upon investigation, however, Starbucks did not follow through with their green initiative and the cups ended up in the landfill. This is not the first case where Starbucks had displayed environmental degradation: they’ve employed municipalities without commercial recycling, and no access to recycling services.

In the past, Starbucks was ranked within the Top 15 Best Companies for the Planet in 2009. (Business Insider) As part of their global responsibility moving into the future, they are committed to “green retail”: energy-efficient branches, adaption of LEED, and energy and water conservation.

Although Starbucks didn’t uphold the eco-friendly standard they were formerly known for, consumers shouldn’t boycott the company just yet. The action taken to become environmentally friendly will take time: the company cannot change overnight, however, any steps taken towards bettering the environment are a step in the right direction.

 

Sources:

Business Insider: The 15 Best Companies for the Planet

SCS Global Services: Starbucks C.A.F.E. Practices

Starbucks: Global Responsibility Report Goals & Progress 2014

 

 

 

Walmart, created by Sam Walton in 1962, was built on the idea of low prices and great service. After becoming a public company in 1970, they went on to build a corporate empire and is currently ranked first on Fortune 500.

Unfortunately, not all fairy tales can last forever.

Walmart is floundering after undergoing it’s worst stock decline in over 25 years. (Bloomberg) Analysts predict that the company’s profits will drop 6-12% in the next year. (Business Insider) Walmart has been riding high for years by attracting customers with their variety of goods at cheap prices. However, with wholesalers becoming increasingly popular, such as Costco and Trader Joe’s, Walmart is no longer consumers “go-to” store.

So how will Walmart respond?

A good starting place would be reconsidering their business model. To lower their cost structure, Walmart employees are paid minimum wage. However, this provides low incentive to work hard and satisfy customers’ needs. This may be the reason that Walmart, a company founded on great service, is receiving complaints on the treatment of their customers. In addition, their “everyday low prices” may be so low that it’s unsustainable. In response to all the speculation, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon’s taking this all in stride and claims that the company will “continue to get stronger.” (Business Insider) Despite McMillon’s optimism, only time will tell the future of Walmart.

Sources:

Business Insider: Walmart’s Entire Business Model is Crumbling

Business Insider: Walmart is Finally Paying the Price

The Street: Walmart’s Entire Business Model is Being Smashed to Pieces

Walmart: Company Facts

 

 

In 1976, three friends came together to develop a computer prototype deemed the Apple I. Steve Wozniak, Steve Jobs, and Ron Wayne have come a long way since then with the development of MacBooks, iPhones, and iPads. However, it is unlikely that they could have foreseen the empire that Apple would become today. After all, they never predicted their small computer business would expand into the automotive industry.

After dominating the technology market for years, Apple is trying their hand at producing cars. The project, code-named “Titan”, will be an electric car and is said to be shipped out in 2019. It will have CarPlay capabilities, which allows users to connect their iPhones and get directions, receive phone calls, and listen to music.

Although Apple is a multi-billion dollar company, the iCar is a risky venture and may result in huge losses for the business. Apple’s key competitor will be Tesla, as they are both producing electric vehicles for the same customer segment. The cars are rumoured to be similarly priced, giving an advantage to Tesla, who has already built a reputable band name. Apple is hoping their product differentiation through CarPlay will overcome customer’s loyalty to Tesla. Nonetheless, the iCar is still in the making and has a long ways to go before hitting the streets.

Sources:

Global News: Would You Buy an iCar?

The Economist: From iPhones to iCars

The Wall Street Journal: Apple Targets Electric-Car Shipping Date for 2019

Macworld: iCar Release

Porter’s Generic Strategies 

It’s an age old debate: are men or women better?

Although there is no concrete answer, men are winning the battle, in regards to C-Suite positions. Studies show that in Fortune 500 companies, 15% of women are C-Suite executives and a mere 5% are CEO’s (Business Insider). This statistic is alarming considering women make up 51% of the employees in management positions (Business Insider).

What is to blame for this inequality?

Some would say gender biases, lingering about women in authoritative positions. Although people may not be conscious of it, they have different expectations for men and women. In an attempt to counteract this, programs have been set up over the years to create more opportunities for women in the business industry. Catalyst, for example, provides services to help empower women to take on leadership roles and Lean In is dedicated to achieving gender equality all over the world.

Despite the fact that these initiatives are useful, I believe that everything ultimately comes down to earning positions through hard work. Regardless if you’re a man or a woman, jobs are not simply handed out. Whether it be having a special skill or being able to speak 5 languages, when it comes down to it, you are hired for what you are able to bring to the table. Your contributions to the company is the key into the C-Suite.

Sources:

Bloomberg: Women’s C-Suite Equality is Only 100 Years Away

Business Insider: ‘Lean In’ Isn’t Enough: Women’s Progress In Leadership Has Stalled

Fast Company: The Business Case for Women in the C-Suite

Forbes: Hidden Bias Prevents Gender Equality In The C-Suite

 

 

Picture this: While inside a clothing store, you overhear a customer complaining to an employee. She is looking for additional sizes, but the manager replies, “I’m sorry but one size fits most. It doesn’t fit all.”

Touched upon in Eileen Li’s blog, Brandy Melville, an Italian brand, recently expanded with over 30 locations in USA and 10 stores within Canada. It’s target market is teenage girls…assuming they can fit into the retailer’s clothes.

Coining the term “Brandy Babes”, Brandy Melville is not only selling clothing but also an ideal that girls everywhere are buying into. This aesthetic is largely promoted through Instagram, where pictures of Brandy Melville models are uploaded at least once a day. With 3.0 million followers, their customers are constantly receiving exposure to the brand.

Although Brandy Melville has received lots of negative feedback, I agree with Eileen that the store should “not be attacked for it’s exclusiveness”. However, the company should consider catering towards all customers. Speaking from personal experience, employees are required to wear Brandy clothing while working. By this logic, the company only hires “skinny” girls, reinforcing the company’s image. Consequently, the store is limited in hiring and target audience. Competing stores are now producing “dupes” in a wider range of sizes, satisfying those unhappy with Brandy Melville . Inevitably, the brand’s profit margins will suffer due to narrow-minded thinking and the world will see the fall of the Brandy Babe.

 

 

Sources:

Brandy Melville Official Site

Huffington Post: An Open Letter to Brandy Melville

Smells Like Teen Spirit: Inside the Secretive World of Brandy Melville

Yahoo Finance: Hottest Teen Retailer Sells Only to “Skinny Girls”

 

 

In the ruthless, dog-eat-dog world of business, companies are doing all they can to stay competitive. Attempting to bring in more profit, some businesses are electing to use locally sourced products and in turn, raise their prices, while others are opting for a different route: cheaper labour.

Nestlé is a company that falls under the latter category. Their products range from baby food to coffee to bottled water. However, they are best known for their chocolate. Aéro, Coffee Crisp, KitKat, and Smarties, to name a few, are the foundation of every trick-or-treaters bag at Halloween time. Although these sweet treats bring delight to the majority of children, there are a select few who do not share this same sentiment.

Child labour is still proving to be a persistent problem on Nestlé’s cocoa farms, which have 83 workers under the age of 18 in their employ, as of December 2014. Expecting adolescents to use machetes bigger than themselves in order to cut costs is morally and ethically wrong in numerous ways. Not only does this put the children in danger, but it also denies them potential educational opportunities. Without proper schooling, they will be limited to very few jobs in the future. In addition, Nestlé is in direct violation of their employees’ Human Rights, as outlined by the United Nations. Although it explicitly says in their Supplier Code of Conduct that they acknowledge child labour is prohibited, their actions and choices obviously contradict it. This company’s behaviour has been unacceptable but they have done little to improve the situation as Nestlé’s sole focus is earning more money and they do not care at whose expense.

Sources:

Child Labour on Nestlé Farms: Chocolate Giant’s Problems Continue 

Cocoa Sustainability to Take 50 More Years without Change

Is there Slavery in your Chocolate?

Nestlé Supplier Code