This blog makes references to Candice Chiu’s blog post “WE are the Power of Change- The Story of a Social Enterprise” (https://blogs.ubc.ca/candicechiu/2013/11/13/we-are-the-power-of-change-the-story-of-a-social-enterprise/).

When I first heard that we were talking about social enterprises in class, the first organization that popped into my mind was Free the Children. Throughout my high school career, I have been actively inspired and involved with this organization. I have so much passion towards their vision, mission and their incredible work across the globe.

Free the Children is a charity organization that seeks to empower youth to make a difference in the world and to discover and achieve their full potential as change agents. Founded by a curious 12 year old, Craig Kielburger, along with his brother, Marc, have been changing the world since 1995. The movement is still strong and growing after all these years, driven with the same vision that initially sparked Craig’s passion.

Free the Children have since initiated many community charities and development programs to improve lifestyle and provide aid (such as enhancing education, water and sanitation, health, income and livelihood, and agriculture and food security) to third-world countries. Furthermore as discussed in Candice’s blog post, Me to We, a social enterprise, manufactures and sells products where part of the profit goes towards supporting Free the Children. Finally, Free the Children created We Day. We Day is a movement of this generation, empowering young citizens through a workshop-like day of speakers, performers and inspiration.

For the past couple years, I was blessed enough to be involved with many Free the Children’s campaigns including We Scare Hunger, We Create Change and two global initiatives. We Scare Hunger supported the food bank by collecting non-perishable food items on Halloween to raise awareness about local hunger. We Create Change collected pennies to raise money to build schools over seas. Together with my high school, I helped create, organize and run two fundraiser which both raised more than $20,000 for water and sanitation projects in Kenya and to build schools in Sierra Leone. Because of my efforts in these initiatives, I was privileged enough to meet Craig Kielburger and other inspirational speakers, including Spencer West at We Day 2012.

Without a doubt, it is evident I have a passion for this sort of work. I can not think of a more suitable example that fully encompasses the aspects of a social enterprise than Free the Children. Their charity is truly inspiration and is still growing. I am excited to see how the Kielburger brothers will continue to impact the world.

To learn more about this incredible organization, take a look at their website: http://www.freethechildren.com/about-us/our-story/

Check out this amazing movement that is sweeping across Canada and US: http://www.weday.com/what-is-we-day/our-story/

Source 1: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/09/28/free-the-children-penny-drive_n_1924312.html

Source 2: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/we-day-draws-activists-to-toronto-with-emphasis-on-engaging-young-people-to-care/article14431332/

This blog makes references to Mikaela Wang’s blog post “Tom Dobranski: Realizing Passion and Potential” (https://blogs.ubc.ca/mikaelawang/2012/11/18/tom-dobranski-realizing-passion-and-potential/).

The familiar question: “What do you want to be when you grow up?” has always haunted me. I would try and slither my way out of answering it at all costs. Why? Because I never knew what I wanted to do. But here’s the funny thing, I still don’t have an answer.

It always seemed like everyone else had their life figured out, their goals they wanted to pursue, and how they plan on achieving them. Then there’s me: lost, confused and torn between my passion and career. It has always been drilled in my head: A passion is something to think about on the side, after your career has taken off and you are stable. This was my mindset until I had the privilege to hear about Tom Dobrzanski’s story.

As Mikaela addressed, Tom’s secret to success was to explore and pursue what makes your heart happy, “because passion differentiates a great career from good careers”. Tom was able to combine his love for music and his business-background to stimulate a profession that satisfies his passion. Like Tom, I am very passionate about music, as well as dance. I enjoy writing my own music and fiddling around with the guitar and piano. However, I never gave the music and dance industry a second thought when thinking of my future career. “There are too many risks”, “It’s just a silly dream”, “It’s a waste of my time”, “Nothing will come out of it”. As I was making excuses for my lack of action, I failed to realize the only thing stopping me, was ultimately myself.

In an article by Eric Sinoway, people must take advantage of life’s inflection points. They are opportunities for people to take a hold of their own destinies. You must not be afraid to test out your ideas, for you will never know what will happen if you take that risk. Tom Dobrzanski’s story has inspired me to not be afraid of taking risks and thinking in the future. I truly hope that wherever I may end up career-wise, I find a passionate Peony along with it.

Blog Reference 1: https://blogs.ubc.ca/mikaelawang/2012/11/18/tom-dobranski-realizing-passion-and-potential/

Source Article 1: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/7041.html

Figure 1: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-money/business-funding/how-to-build-a-world-class-recording-studio-on-the-cheap/article4585699/

Reflecting on the Human Resource practices explored in the lecture, the professors proposed a question that left me thinking. What motivates you right now? What will motivate you when you are 40 years old? When you are retired? The easy answer for young adults, like myself, would be money. Like most others, I am a financially struggling university student. Saving money or earning money is very desirable and therefore, would be a major motivator. However, the later questions got me thinking. When I grow up and am more financially stable, will money still be my main motivator? If not, what would?

According to many blogs and articles, money is not the top motivator in a business. Edward Deci noted that people have three physiological needs: to feel independent and self-governing, to feel capable and skilled and to have good interpersonal relationships with others. Money does not fit in with any of these needs. Money may be what initially attracts people’s attention, but it doesn’t do a good job keeping it. There must be other factors out there that maximizes employees motivation and thus, increasing satisfaction and productivity for the long run.

Creating a sense of autonomy in the work place will intrinsically motivate employees. They will feel respected and more in control. Unlike money, an extrinsic motivator, having a reasonably autonomic work environment will make employees want to do their best, rather than having money be their “bait” to come to work. Also mentioned in the Entrepreneur Blog, simple statements of praise will motivate people. It’s inevitable. When someone compliments you on something, you cannot help but smile and feel good about yourself. You would want to do anything to receive that compliment again. Therefore, you are motivated to repeat that success and work harder. Finally, when people feel like their job has significance and a purpose, it will ultimately create greater job satisfaction and lead to greater motivation. Although money will ignite the spark, it will not keep the flame burning.

Blog Reference 1: http://blog.clarity.fm/how-money-can-hurt-employee-motivation/

Blog Reference 2: http://www.entrepreneur.com/blog/225041

Article Source 1: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120509-is-it-all-about-the-money/1

Article Source 2: http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/06/money-motivation-pay-leadership-managing-employees.html

Figure 1: http://community.sparknotes.com/2011/01/21/interview-with-a-sparkler-round-million-dollar-billz-for-everyone

This blog makes references to Tiana Mae Piva’s blog post “Pinterest: The Marketing Strategy of the Future” (https://blogs.ubc.ca/tianapiva/2013/10/04/pinterest-the-online-marketing-strategy-of-the-future/)

The most beautiful thing in my inbox: the weekly Pinterest “Pin’s you’ll love!” email. This email provides me with a custom tailored look into the world of photo-sharing based on the recent pins I have repinned, liked or searched up. It gives me “promoted pins” suggestions, as well as new boards to follow based on my historical interests.

Pinterest is a perfect example of a company that uses data collected from their users to help further enhance the user’s experience on their website and create unique marketing strategies. Pinterest uses a management information system (MIS) to gather user information. By adapting business technology management (BTM) , Pinterest uses the information collected and technology for important decision making. The effective use of information technology has helped Pinterest increase their ability to sense and respond.

As addressed in Tiana’s blog post,  Pinterest used this technology and introduced the concept of “Rich pins”, which allows business owners to grow their customer base by providing compelling images of their products, deals and promotions. Also, Pinterest allows these businesses to put additional information in their pins, including price of products and external links to their websites. By including this marketing strategy, customers are able to fully experience the beauty of photo-sharing and take it one step further: making purchases.

Pinterest has enhanced their value proposition through IT by getting the customers’ interest, keeping healthy customer relationships and growing their customer base. Pinterest is definitely keeping customers interested.

Source 1: https://blogs.ubc.ca/tianapiva/2013/10/04/pinterest-the-online-marketing-strategy-of-the-future/

Source 2: http://www.businessinsider.com/pinterest-is-fastest-growing-content-sharing-platform-2013-11

The familiar sound of grinding coffee beans, the overwhelming scent of cinnamon and distant chatter between friendly faces fill the quaint Starbucks coffee shop. This crisp autumn morning is now complete as I sip on my piping hot holiday drink. As I settle down with my homework sprawled across the table, I could not help but reflect on something that happened just minutes ago. As I was ordering my drink, the Starbucks barista, much to my surprise, unexpectedly said: “Sorry for the long and inconvenient wait, here, your drink is on us. Have a wonderful Saturday!”.

Those two simple sentences got me thinking. Wow, what an incredible and refreshing culture Starbucks has developed. Starbucks’ vision is to completely engage and create a personal connection with their customers. They want to create an uplifting atmosphere and be genuine in their conversations and actions.Today, I experienced their values and beliefs through the organization’s observable artifacts. By offering the free drink, Starbucks demonstrates that their company cares about their customers and are devoted to creating a sense of belonging in this “haven”. With such an evident and respectable organization culture, Starbucks is able to engage in a positive culture.

Although creating such an inviting and captivating environment can be difficult and time consuming, Starbucks has proved that investing in a positive culture will ultimately benefit the company through customer loyalty and satisfaction. Starbucks’ mission statement “to inspire and nurture the human spirit – one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time” is truly enhanced through their strong culture.

Check out Starbucks’ awesome mission statement here: http://www.starbucks.ca/about-us/company-information/mission-statement

Also take a look at this blog I referred to: http://tortora.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/starbucks-mission-statement/

This blog makes references to Jeffrey Tung’s blog post “Twitter Going Public- Will You Buy Their Shares?” (https://blogs.ubc.ca/chehsiangtung/2013/10/07/twitter-going-public-will-you-buy-their-shares/)

Twitter’s announcement of going public has caused quite the hype around the business world. As Jeffrey Tung described in his blog, there has been a back and forth debate on whether buying Twitter’s shares would be a good investment or a risky one. Jeffrey addressed how buying a share would not be a good idea due to past IPO’s of social media companies, for example, Facebook. The stock plunged after it’s IPO.

Over the past weekend, the New York Stock Exchange ran a “dry test” for Twitter’s IPO which was described as very successful. They predict that when Twitter finally goes public around the U.S. Thanksgiving Holiday, it will just be as successful, if not more.

However, there are still many issues that could potentially hinder Twitter’s IPO success. First, as addressed by Jeffrey, Facebook’s, a leading competitor to Twitter, IPO did not go well. People may be reluctant to buy Twitter’s shares. Additionally, Twitter’s main revenue stream is from advertisements. This is a very unstable and unpredictable revenue stream. Twitter is also not releasing all of their details, making the customers less confident. Another factor making consumers less confident is the recent government shutdown. In the CBC news article, it states that U.S. consumer confidence is falling, in turn, declining consumer spending.

Although the dry run had a favourable outcome, it does not necessarily mean the actual exchange will occur that way. There are still multiple problems that could stand in the way of Twitter’s IPO success. Will these issues burden Twitter’s success or are they negligible? Will the success from the dry run carry over to the actual IPO?

Figure 1: http://mashable.com/2013/10/03/6-things-twitter-ipo/

Source 1: http://news.yahoo.com/nyse-holds-successful-dry-run-twitter-ipo-222750401–finance.html

Source 2: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/u-s-consumer-confidence-falls-after-government-shutdown-1.2286926

Source 3: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304500404579126950604701622

When I heard about the U.S. government shutdown of 2013, I had to hold in a little chuckle. I had never heard of a government completely shutting down. How big and dramatic could this problem or dispute be that lead to a government shutdown? Has U.S. politics really become so bitter that the government can no longer function itself?

The shutdown occurred because the two houses of Congress, the Republicans and the Democrats, failed to agree on a new budget. The two conflicting parties argued back and forth about Obamacare. The condition for passing a bill was this healthcare law. Because they missed their deadline for this spending bill, this estimated three-week shutdown fell upon the American government. Due to this recent shutdown, over 700,000 federal employees are now facing an unpaid leave. The department of education, energy, health and human services are expected to be greatly affected by the shutdown. A large fraction of their staff will be sent home. Not only will the workforce be affected, national parks and some government museums will close, and services like passport processing will be put to a halt.

After reading about the first shutdown in the U.S. since 1996, I couldn’t help but wonder how it would impact businesses. For instance, a small business owner may need government loans to sustain their business. However, the owner now has to wait until the shutdown is lifted. The delay in loan may cause problems for running the business and can lead to long-term issues and debt. The shutdown ultimately threatens the economy and puts it at risk.

How long do you think the shutdown will last? Should the U.S. government stop playing the blame game and start resolving this problem? Do you think the first shutdown in 17 years was preventable?

Figure 1: http://www.policymic.com/articles/65009/government-shutdown-2013-what-s-in-it-for-you

Source 1: http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/30/politics/shutdown-showdown/index.html

Source 2: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24343698

Blackberry was once known as the leader of the smartphone market. They were initially the first to “claim” this unique position in the consumer’s mind. According to Al Ries and Jack Trout’s book, Positioning: The Battle for your Mind, being the first brand to position themselves in a certain market will ultimately lead to success. This is because consumers usually keep the market leaders in mind. However, for Blackberry, the outcome did not turn out as desired. Why did Blackberry fail to succeed and maintain it’s leading position in the smartphone market? Is it too late to raise this company from the dead?

To maintain the leadership position, Ries and Trout stated that the brand must be willing to embrace change. This was Blackberry’s mistake that led to their downfall. Blackberry was always known for their convenient keyboard. As Apple Inc.’s iPhones and Google’s Androids began to surface and grow in the smartphone market, Blackberry failed to acknowledge their competitors’ touch-screen design. Blackberry wanted to stay loyal and continued producing with a keyboard. Because of Blackberry’s unwillingness to embrace change, the company began to come crashing down.

Recently, RIM released the Blackberry Z10, a touch-screen Blackberry. However, the release of the phone was not as successful as they had hoped. Blackberry had finally began to embrace the change in the market, but it was too late. Their previous success blinded Blackberry from acting fast to the changing market and failed to maintain their leadership position. This led to other competitors in the market to become steps ahead of Blackberry, as they gradually fall behind.

Is it too late for Blackberry to replicate their success? Can Blackberry recover from their major downfall or was being first their last impression on this growing market?

Source 1: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/the-inside-story-of-why-blackberry-is-failing/article14563602/

Source 2: http://www.quickmba.com/marketing/ries-trout/positioning/

Figure 1: http://www.techknowlogists.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/bbz10stevenson.jpg

Price gouging is often defined as charging very high prices for products and items that are in high demand in market. A large part of society believes that price gouging is greedy and should be illegal. Is it unjust and unethical for price gouging to occur, especially after a natural disaster? Or does price gouging ultimately lead to a positive result?

Many places have issued an anti-gouging law which states that people are not allowed to gouge in markets. However, economists look at this issue of price gouging very differently. They disregard the emotional aspect of price gouging and simply look at how it is best for society. Gouging is simply the market at work, guided by the invisible hand and can lead to a greater good.

Imagine a town that has just been struck by a hurricane and there is a need for flashlights. There is only one store that sells flashlights after the disaster. If anti-gouging laws were in effect, anyone can go and buy the flashlight, no matter how intense or valid their reason for purchasing is. Therefore, the flashlight supply will run out quickly and becomes a “first come, first serve” basis. This will limit people who actually need flashlights to survive to purchase one. However, if gouging was allowed, the consumers that view flashlights as a necessity will be willing to spend a lot of money to obtain it.

Gouging helps distribute scarce goods to those who need them most. The anti-gouging laws interfere with the invisible hand as it guides the free market. Do you believe that gouging is a positive impact on markets? Is it unethical?

Here’s a link to a video podcast regarding the price gouging issue: http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/More+Shows/The+Invisible+Hand/ID/2250922676/

Figure 1: http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/ctnj.php/archives/entry/price_gouging/

LinkedIn is a well-known social networking website for people in the professional occupations. It allows job seekers to upload resumes and browse for job openings, while employers search for fitting applicants. When it first began, their services were free. However, LinkedIn now charges users to use their website. They charge employers to post jobs and get access to resumes. Hopeful applicants now have the option of buying LinkedIn’s “premium” services. For $29.95 per month, the payer’s job application will move to the top of the list as a “featured applicant”. It doesn’t matter if the applicant has appropriate qualifications, their resumes will be regarded as top priority. This service brings about questionable business practices and unpromising benefits. First, this offer discriminates against people who may not be able to afford this special placement service. It is unfair and immoral. Second, the benefit that LinkedIn promises may not at all be valuable. Would employers be impressed that his potential future employees paid their way for placement? Recruiters may feel cheated by the applicants. Although LinkedIn is not the only company offering this “premium” service, that does not make it less ethical. LinkedIn must find a way to restructure their offerings to give a more ethical value to job seekers.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2013/09/03/has-linkedin-crossed-an-ethical-line/