For almost a year, there has been hype over Target Corporation’s entry into Canada. An American retailing company, Target has had much success in the U.S., generating a revenue of US$73.3 billion in 2012. [1]   According to Forum Research, however, only 27% of Target Canada’s polled customers claimed to be “very satisfied” with their experience at the store. [2] What was Target Canada doing wrong?

Comments posted by customers on business.financialpost.com last month highlighted the following issues:

• lack of stock / poor selection of products
• noncompetitive pricing
• poor quality of service

On September 6, Target announced that the company will be working to increase sales in healthcare, food, beauty, and paper, and to adjust inventory and in-store staffing . [3]

Target has put the Urgent-Important Matrix to use.  While keeping focus on increasing profit on a long-term scale by improving product categories with slower sales – an important goal – the company is also addressing issues that directly affect customer satisfaction based on recent customer feedback – a critical activity.

Although we have yet to see the results of Target’s plans, we can clearly see the Urgent-Important Matrix put into action by a major corporation.

——————————————————————————————————————–

[1] “Target Corporation”

[2] “Target Losing Ground with Canadian Customers as Satisfaction Levels Reach New low”

[3] “Target to open 23 more stores in Canada, including its first in Quebec and N.S.”

 

 

Works Cited:

“Target Losing Ground with Canadian Customers as Satisfaction Levels Reach New low.”Financial Post. National Post, 19 Aug. 2013. Web. 21 Sept. 2013. <http://business.financialpost.com/2013/08/19/target-losing-ground-with-canadian-customers-as-satisfaction-levels-reach-new-low/>.

 

“United States Securities and Exchange Commission – Target Corporation.” United States Securities and Exchange Commission. U.S. AID, 15 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 Sept. 2013. <http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/27419/000104746912002714/       a2207838z10-k.htm>.

After a lecture, I was anxious to begin the bulk of work planned for my two-hour break, but decided to first get my favourite drink.  Although a tremendously long lineup encircled the café, it was worth the wait. Half an hour later, I finally stood at the cashier.

“A passion fruit slush, please.”

“We don’t carry passion fruit.”

Confused, I read the sign: passion fruit slush, $4.

“Here, on the sign-“

“No, sorry.”

I left, frustrated. While I valued the beverage at the amount of wait time, I received no value for my time. The café did not deliver what it claimed to offer, paying a small cost of $4 potential revenue. A quarter of my time, which could have been efficiently used to study, was undoubtedly worth well over $4 to me.

Now, did the café only lose $4 of potential revenue?  I will less likely return to the café, and will suggest friends to visit other eateries (especially for beverages).  Being first-year students, we would have been the café’s customers for several years.  My friends may also pass on the suggestion. The café is then potentially losing revenue from orders of numerous relatively long-term customers.

So, who paid the greater opportunity cost?

 

 

Emotional labour is often required of employees by employers to provide customers with a specific environment and company image. For instance, an airline aims to provide quality flight experience, thus needing flight attendants to have constant pleasant demeanour towards passengers.

Assuming that employees know of the job nature upon applying to work for a certain company, emotional labour may not appear to be an ethical issue.  However, this is not always the case.

Call centre workers in India serving U.S. customers must perform emotional labour involving “national identity management”. To better identify with customers, they are to act American through usage of American colloquialisms and familiarity with American popular culture, and to mask their location in India.

Regardless of workers’ acceptance of such requirements and the success achieved in satisfying American customers as a result, is it not unethical for the company to demand such from its employees? Racism is promoted in that employees must adopt American behaviour in order to satisfy an American market, implying inability and inferiority of Indian citizens in international business.  Employees are denied a basic human right: their ethnic identity.

The ethics of emotional labour thus lie in the extremity of expectations imposed by employers.

Source: Chong, Patricia. “Servitude with a Smile: An Anti-Oppression Analysis of Emotional Labour.” Global Labour University Working Papers. March 2009. <http://www.global-labour-university.org/fileadmin/GLU_Working_Papers/GLU_WP_ No.7.pdf>.

Photo: http://www.funinsky.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/image8.png