Everyone has DEFINITELY heard of Toms. Who has not? The Blake Mycoskie’s company TOMS, gives away one pair to a child in need. Great idea, wonderful shoes, helped indeed. The concept social responsibility pops into my head when thinking of this innovative idea. However, I feel like people don’t really understand the true nature behind the goal of this company. At this point, the main reason why the TOMS are being purchased is because “everyone has it”, I believe. I could be completely wrong. But I truly believe that there are very few companies that have created such a great awareness amongst people. No one before this issue was raised really understood the fact people in underprivileged countries don’t have the simple necessities in life. This is therefore a concept which has actually helped underprivileged children. The concept of TOMS was first introduced to me in the summer of 2011 when I was at summer school in Cambridge and my advertising and Media professor introduced me to this idea. Right after I got back home, I bought them. They’re one of the best pairs I own.
Antrepo, a design consultancy conducts several experiments and one of them caught my eye very effectively. They conducted an experiment called the Minimalist effect where they repackaged some very large brand products to be specific to the brand name. This got me thinking, how important IS the packaging to a customer? And I realized, very. Why? Because of the mere fact that colors attract people, fancy, over the top and out there packaging stands out and catches attention. I would always go for the product which stands out and whose packaging I like compared to the one that just has the brand name on it. Packaging is how a product is recognized and admired and that is the reason why packaging is important.
However, over the years, it has been noticed that brands have been using the minimalist technique to make their brand name simpler and to the point. For example, the apple logo used to be so much more brighter and out there and now it is simpler. Personally I would choose the rainbow one out of the transitions shown below.
Save On Meats: A mecca for Downtown Eastside
Save on meats can truly be called the mecca for the downtown. There have been several other restaurants that follow the social cause. Such as the dark table which is a restaurant that has blind servers and give the customer a complete experience of dining in the dark. While save on meats respectively, hires those that are unfortunate and cannot find a job. As the Eastside of downtown is classified as “lost hope”, when save on meats opened, they hired locals and increased the number of employed people. And therefore both these restaurants have a good reputation are very easily said to be very socially conscious and therefore have increased demands for their products. It gives a very high important to the “experience” aspect of marketing. Giving it a boost up. This helps the customers really understand the cause for the business’ goals and aspirations which helps them gain what they want easily. In the process creating a good reputation for their cause.
The business Pundit commented on the “worst corporate accounting scandals of all time” that someone sent to him as a graphic. He comments that making accounting scandals in the business industry at this time of a technological movement, and where it is possible to do anything through internet, is the worst type of a scandal that can happen to a business and that they are very hard to cover up. This according to me, shows how important it is to professionally look over accounts of businesses as these scandals can easily be overlooked. So after looking at this post, a question rose in my mind. How much can we trust the businesses that we rely on for everyday aspects. If they can lie about their financial statements, they can lie about the qualities of their products, their prices, their ethics, their attention to or rather their lack of attention to social and environmental aspects. This really makes us think about whom to trust and whom not to and the reputation that every company has and whether each of the companies deserve the given reputation.
Well, we all know that businesses, especially those in the food and beverage industry, need to heavily rely on research to understand their customers better. However it is important, that when the research is done and the results are implemented and put into action, the products meet the needs of the customers. For example, I’m Indian and I like my spice and the indian touch to my food. Therefore, when given the choice to me, between the Angus Third Pounder and the Chicken Maharaja-Mac I would choose the Chicken Maharaja. This shows that because of my heritage and who I am, I prefer something that matches and fulfils the “Indian qualities” in me. In order to meet these requirements, a lot of research has to be done. This will make sure that the customer base will gain brand loyalty and will feel a connection to the brand.
Therefore market research is very important to get the details about your products right.
A 27-year old woman was fired by the popular franchise Tim Hortons, after giving away a free timbit which cost about 16 cents at that point of time to a 11-month year old. The reason that was given to her for her being fired was that “it was against the policy to give away free items to customers”. The lost job cost her and her family money for their daily bread. Though she was re-hired later on, how ethically right is it to fire an employee for making their customers happy? Given what is taught and understood, a business earns its profits through customers. And customers only buy a business’ product if the customer is happy with the service provided. Such actions by one franchise creates a havoc and a reputation loss amongst customers. She was re-hired later in the same year by another franchise of Tim Hortons. Which is more important? Following rules? or being ethical? What does a business do when following rules makes it unethical?
– in response to Katie Chow’s blog post:
Advertising and Marketing are huge things for every organization. And every organization makes mistakes. Do these mistakes really deserve to be spoken about? How effectively do these advertisements manage to mislead their customers?
As we can see in this video : provided by Katie, we can see that another product has been used to video shoot the advertisement which was meant to be shot by the camera that is being advertised. So how much can customers actually trust and believe the product that is actually being advertised as compared to the one that actually is? This is a hard question as things in this generation can be easily hidden through the use of rapidly increasing and advancing technology. This can question the ethicalness and validity of these advertisements very effectively.
However, customers/consumers are known to accept what they are shown due to the sense of authority and sometimes when these “flaws” are unveiled such as the one that was by Nokia’s, things go ignored and the products are bought anyway due to product and brand loyalty. A concept such as brand loyalty ensures that in a way products sales are always high and therefore it can always change their reputation.
In response to Mikaela Wang’s blog entry .
Facebook seems to have gone more public than they already have. They’re putting forward what everyone already knows about Facebook. Facebook has released its first ever “agency-created” advertisement. What does it mean that they are doing this? It could either mean that they are now very effectively targeting markets that are not on Facebook to tell them about the things that facebook has to offer.
However, is that ethical to promote Facebook to a segment such as the younger generation? It is promoting posting information on to the social media and making themselves public. Shouldn’t precautions be taken to prevent such things to happen? However, at the same time, this advertisement will definitely increase Facebook’s popularity of their social networking website.
Their strategy of using images and media which according to Mikaela’s blog are “heart warming” and therefore many relate to this advertisement. I do too. This is a very good tactic that is used. It is very important to recognize a company’s target market in order to create an advertisement that relates to its audience.
Facebook has already reached heights is one of the most talked products of the century. This advertisement makes it even more well known.
Every employer wants to know how “happy” their employees are in the company. The new Employee Engagement takes care of how to understand employees.
This can be a hard task as employees might not always be happy with the company but might lie to keep their jobs. However, the point here is that should employees know about the company or the work that they do?
In these surveys it is possible that they might ask for questions that have nothing to do with their work. Question is, do the companies really care about whether or not their employees know about their companies and their history rather than be only excellent with their work. However it is in a way necessary to gain input from your employees as to what they think of how the company is treating their customers. However how relevant are these surveys? Do they actually give the information needed? And do they actually work on these feedbacks? These surveys don’t exactly tell you the experience that each employee goes through, and can therefore lead to different feedbacks on the same thing from different employees.
I think surveys are applicable to be up to date with situations only to an extent, and some just need one on one interviews.
When it comes to being ethical, businesses view it more as an increase in costs rather than a social responsibility. However, when a big business like the American Airlines goes bankrupt, the only way of getting out of it is through cost-cutting. American Airlines recently had a hearing about their bankruptcy and their cost-cutting contracts were approved. If cost-cuts are taking place, it means that of all the stakeholders present in the company, labor will be affected the most. When cutting cutting costs, it can either mean cutting of wages of laying employees off. This is what American Airlines is doing. Though this order has been approved by the court, how ethical is to lay off employees in a bulk from the company? Like Edward Freeman said, you cannot just satisfy one stakeholder (in this case the owners) as it will mean that there will be a loss in what the other stakeholders could have had offered.
American Airlines Wins Approval of Cost-Cutting Contracts. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-12/amr-wins-court-approval-of-cost-cutting-labor-contracts
