In our recent class on Organisational Culture, we were introduced to an online clothing and shoe store called Zappos.  One aspect about the company that really drew me in was its management and organisation structure that is simply known as Holacracy – a distributed leadership system that focuses on self management/autonomy. One of the most unique aspect of this style is that all the members in organisation have the same power.

The main goal of Holacracy is to allow for distributed decision making while giving everyone the opportunity to work on what they do best. Unlike a normal organisational structure where  the structure of the company is divided on the basis of the levels of management such as CEO at the top of the hierarchy and staff or employees below, Holacracy is based on circles or departments.  Instead of organising the employees, the company organises the work. Employees aren’t delegated any work, they themselves voluntarily choose what they want to do and group themselves into ‘circles’ on the basis of the job they have chosen to do.  Each of the circles have a ‘Lead link’ who are managers that are only responsible for assigning work and overseeing it. The ‘lead link’ do not have the authority to determine how the work should be done and finished.

Zappos’ blogpost accurately describes how Holacracy looks like and how it has affected the lives of their employees. The main points that are described in the blog is how Holacracy has lead to transparency, equal distribution of authority and how it has empowered their employees.  These blog posts helped as a proof as to how Holacracy is a good way to go.

However, according to me, it is quite difficult for a big company to change its structure immediately. As said in the blog post, The managers are trained to step back and allow other people to step up and have an equal level in terms of power. For large companies with 20 000 employees, this process is quite a lengthy one. But above all, I do recommend small start-ups to adopt this organisational structure. There will be a very positive environment as the employees will be much more motivated, employees will  build close relationships to their ‘managers’ and their colleagues. This will also positively influence the image of the company. Holacracy also overall impacts the organisational culture, as it is mentioned in the blog post. It builds onto a sense of empowerment and trust that leads the employees to prioritise their work and their goals.

References:

• “What Does Leadership in Self-Organization Look Like?” Zappos Insights. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. <https://www.zapposinsights.com/blog/item/what-does-leadership-in-selforganization-look-like>.
• Zappos: A Workplace Where No One And Everyone Is The Boss.” NPR. NPR, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. <http://www.npr.org/2015/07/21/421148128/zappos-a-workplace-where-no-one-and-everyone-is-the-boss>.
• Forbes. Forbes Magazine, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. <http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2015/07/20/the-5-types-of-organizational-structures-part-5-holacratic-organizations/#15be39956778>.

One of the few points that was articulately presented in Jeremy’s blogpost was how companies are often criticised for being so – called ethical as we think that it’s for the Halo effect and that they are only doing it to increase consumer base  to eventually maximise their profits. The recent COMM 101 lecture, really amazed me as to how the core motive of businesses is evolving.  Along the decades we all have been taught that one of the most important motive for businesses is to generate a large amount of profit.  However, as time is progressing, the dynamics of the business is evolving too. Now companies are emerging to have sustainability as their core motives.

An American outdoor apparel company called Patagonia has been integrating its core values into it company culture.  It has followed a few of the ten ways to present their core values to their customers which includes making consumers as their celebrities, giving clear proof of impact, and inspiring their employees to be their brand advocates . Patagonia has been an advocate of environmental sustainability and recently it has reached its last stage of sustainability which is Innovation. In the past year, Patagonia has announced its dissolution of its CSR and sustainability department in hopes of integrating innovative sustainability work ethics and thinking in its corporate culture.

It had used ‘anti-marketing’ through the slogan “don’t buy this jacket”  in order to advocate their campaign against over consumption and also served as an advertising of their repair service where consumers can repair their jacket for free rather than purchasing a new one. This will definitely decrease their profitability and increase their costs.

 Patagonia is an accredited and founding member of the Fair Labor Association . Despite of all of these values ingrained in Patagonia’s corporate culture, 5 years ago, Patagonia was trapped in multiple instances of human trafficking, forced labor, poor treatment of sheep in farms in which they get their wools from etc.  Since then, Patagonia has teamed up with other brands on a project called Responsible Wool Standard to protect sheep from harmful practices.

Patagonia has always been an industry leader when it comes to human and animal rights across its supply chain yet it still gets caught up in scandals. However, it is always working its way up again, always finding new better efficient methods. This clearly means that Patagonia spends a lot of capital on its research and development as well as for its customer service.

This business stands as a proof that actually indulging in CSR and a business based on beliefs and values can actually be rewarding once consumers recognise the company’s genuine commitment.

References:

• “How Patagonia Are Revolutionising CSR & Sustainability.” CSR Central. N.p., 24 May 2015. Web. 30 Oct. 2016. <http://csrcentral.com/patagonia-the-clothing-company-with-a-revolutionary-approach-to-csr-sustainability/>.
• @TravelKindly. “10 Ways Today’s Purpose-Driven Brands Can Bring Their Core Values To Life.” Co.Exist. N.p., 14 Oct. 2013. Web. 30 Oct. 2016. <https://www.fastcoexist.com/3019856/10-ways-todays-purpose-driven-brands-can-bring-their-core-values-to-life>.
• The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016. <http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/06/patagonia-labor-clothing-factory-exploitation/394658/>.
• Corporate Social Responsibility – Highlighted by MEC | Jeremy Bednar’s Blog.” Jeremy Bednars Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/jeremybednar/2016/10/30/corporate-social-responsibility-highlighted-by-mec/>.
• Michelson, Megan. “What Patagonia Has to Say About That Horrifying PETA Video.” Outside Online. N.p., 29 Oct. 2015. Web. 30 Oct. 2016. <http://www.outsideonline.com/2008416/patagonia-responds-horrifying-peta-video>.

After coming across Kamil Kulewski’s blog post about how Moschino’s  pill themed fashion line has caused an outrage, I was quite astounded to see how a well known brand could undervalue a topic like prescription drug and glamorise it in the name of fashion.

However, Moschino is not the only brand that has touched such a sensitive topic that has led to offending quite a number of people. Amongst a plethora of brands, ‘Urban Outfitters’ stands tall. It has made countless number of headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Over the years, UO has offended Hindus, Jewish, Eating-disorder awareness groups, native groups etc. As a Hindu, I was personally offended when UO came out with a line of Lord Ganesha depicted on socks. In Hindu culture, the feet are perceived to be one of the most impure part of the body, and to have a holy figure around it was disheartening.
Other controversies include:

– A faux bloodstained Kent State Sweatshirt that widely depicted the 1970 Kent State massacre

-Tapestries that had grey and white stripes with pink triangles that clearly recalled the clothing Nazis forced gay prisoners to wear.

– The most recent controversy as of April 2016 was when UO came out with a shampoo for “suicidal hair”.

Since 2003, more than 18 controversies have been discussed in the media. It’s quite interesting to see that every time UO   ‘accidentally’ offend a certain ethnicity, race, religion or an awareness group and after it goes viral in the media, they immediately discontinue the products.

If these mistakes only happened a couple of times, just like what happened to Moschino,  I would certainly agree with Kamil that it can be avoided with a better marketing team that put more effort on market research.

However, it seems like these moves are intentional and are helping UO with gaining more brand awareness. With the controversies going Viral on social media amongst teenagers, It effectively leads to word of mouth marketing strategy. Sitting in Asia, where there are  no Urban Outfitters store, I already knew about the brand and so did my peers. As of today UO has a large following on Social Media.

We can clearly see that Urban Outfitters have adopted Guerrilla marketing strategy to its advantage. This is an unconventional strategy where consumers are taken aback and are left with an impression in their mind. UO is quite smart in the sense that they don’t overuse this strategy as it may evoke a range of strong negative emotions that will affect sales of the company but do it just enough to create a hype in the media and apologise with authentic reasons when they get caught so that their consumer base doesn’t decrease rapidly.

Resources: 

• @TheWeek. “15 Urban Outfitters Controversies.” 15 Urban Outfitters Controversies. N.p., 29 Apr. 2016. Web. 16 Oct. 2016. <http://theweek.com/articles/480961/15-urban-outfitters-controversies>.
• Beusman, Callie. “Urban Outfitters, Ever Insensitive, Pulls Offensive Ganesh Socks.” Jezebel. N.p., 17 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Oct. 2016. <http://jezebel.com/urban-outfitters-ever-insensitive-pulls-offensive-gan-1484982837>.
• @nbcbayarea. “Urban Outfitters’ Controversy a “Mistake” or Marketing Ploy?” NBC Bay Area. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016. <http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Reality-Check-Latest-Urban-Outfitters-Controversy-a-Mistake-or-Marketing-Ploy-275399781.html>.
• “Urban Outfitters Offends on Purpose … and the Strategy Is Actually Working, Say Experts.” N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016. <http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/news/2014/09/16/urban-outfitters-offends-on-purpose.html>.
• “Kamil Kulewski’s Blog – Just Another UBC Blogs Site.” Kamil Kulewskis Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/kamilkulewski/>.

While reading the business news, I came across an article that stated how despite of the losses the Canadian Multinational telecommunications and wireless equipment company – Blackberry is making in North America, it is still one of the dominating brand in Indonesia. As of 2016, there are more than 6 million Blackberry users in Indonesia.

A week ago, BlackBerry, decided to step away from producing its its signature hardware products and focus more on research and development of its software and its application known as the “Blackberry Messenger”. Through examining its market, Blackberry has decided to outsource its production through a Joint Venture with PT. TI phone mobile Indonesia known as “BB Merah Putih” (Blackberry red and white). As soon as the news of the Joint Venture was released, the shared of TI mobile immediately rose by 4.7 percent.

Both of the companies have decided to agree and combine all the resources and all their information. BB Merah Putih is responsible for sourcing, manufacturing and distributing the handsets throughout Indonesia.

This external growth strategy that Blackberry has planned to adopt will have its own pros and cons.

• One of the biggest advantage of having a Joint Venture would be that if the sales are still low, both of the companies will dissolve, it would not lose its legal existence or its identity
• As Blackberry is the most popular in Indonesia, this joint venture will allow the company to provide the types of products that meets the local consumers’ needs, wants and expectations. Through this, it is expected that Blackberry will gain a larger market share.
• Blackberry will  be able to gain a level of expertise without actually hiring anymore staff.
• Through this, Blackberry may also establish its presence in new untested markets.
• This joint venture will allow  Blackberry to completely focus on its core activity and that it is to develop a better software and improve its ‘BBM’ application.  On the other hand, The new joint venture company (BB Merah Putih) will fully focus on the Indonesian market.

Conceptually, a joint venture is a form of a partnership and every partnership run a risk of disagreement amongst the partners. Disagreements and miscommunication seems to be quite prevalent in this joint venture as both of the companies are in different environments and the overall company culture is different and may clashing against each other. All these may cause misunderstandings and may slow down or even disrupt their decision making.

Although Blackberry has been having diminishing performance in these past couple years, I am looking forward to see how this new strategy would turn out to be and how it will affect its stakeholders.

word count: 438

Bibliography:

• “Blackberry Still a Big Hit in Indonesia.” N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.thestar.com/business/2016/09/30/blackberry-still-a-big-hit-in-indonesia.html>.
• “BlackBerry’s First Software and Brand-licensing Deal: A Joint Venture in Indonesia Called BB Merah Putih.” N.p., n.d. Web. <http://venturebeat.com/2016/09/28/blackberry-joint-venture-bb-merah-putih/>.
• “BlackBerry Abandons Its Phone.” N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/technology/blackberry-phones-earnings-q2.html?_r=0>.

Ethics is a system that defines what is right and what is wrong, this concept can be applied to a business environment. An ethical business abides by laws and tries to maintain the best interest of all its stakeholders before any decision is taken into consideration.

Five decades ago, only a handful of businesses were concerned about being ethical. As the times are evolving, external stakeholders are unconsciously expecting businesses to be ethical; ethical buying, no discrimination, zero tolerance to sexual harassment at work, diversity, integrity, honesty, respect etc.

Businesses have tagged themselves as an ethical business but in reality what they are doing is completely opposite. Let’s take a drug company – Turing Pharmaceuticals as an example. On its website, one of their slogan is that “the ability to pay should never be a barrier”. This advertised corporate value was completely false when it came to fulfilling the company’s strategical objectives like maximising profit and market share.

In 2015, Turing raised the price of a drug called Daraprim that is used to treat parasitic infection in patients who have diseases like HIV/AIDS, from $13.50 per tablet to a whopping $750.

Business can also have unethical practices in its internal environment. 7/11, a franchise which has more than 600 stores in Australia was caught in a scandal of underpaying and exploiting its workers. The whole business culture of 7/11 was at fault.

From the two cases above, we see that profit is one of the biggest motive that led these companies have an unethical approach. At times like these, it is important for the government to intervene. Important and rare drugs like the Daraprim should only be supplied by the government. Through this, the companies cannot increase the prices of the drugs just so it could take advantage of the state of the market it is currently in.

Can’t a business be both ethical and successful?

It is very important for business to adopt an ethical approach and have ethical objectives. Being ethical leads a business to be Socially responsible. Consumers would be more attracted towards brands that are socially responsible like ‘the body shop’ and ‘Lush’ and thus have an ethical approach. This will allow the business to build more consumer loyalty and will also create a positive image of itself in the market. These brands will also reduce the risk of legal redress. At first being unethical may seem the easy way out, but when everything gets discolsed, it’s hard for the company to step back up and recreate its image. Companies should be able to balance all the interest of its stakeholder, be in internal or external stakeholders. Good ethical behaviour will always be able to generate better results.

Word count: 445

Bibliography:

• @globeandmail. “Turing, Volkswagen Scandals Show Firms Are Willing to Roll Ethical Dice.” The Globe and Mail. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Sept. 2016.
• @ProfCarlRhodes. “7-Eleven, Volkswagen Cases Show Why We Should Push Back on ‘corporate Ethics'” The Conversation. N.p., 11 Oct. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2016.
• Clicking, By. “Treating Serious &neglected Diseases.” Turing Pharmaceuticals. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2016