The question posed to us was ” If  the United Nations was fully funded why would we need the Arc or social enterprise?” 

The status difference between the rich and the poor is increasing day by day. It is a global issue that is plaguing the every nation, both in developed and developing countries. This problem requires a unique solution, both on a local or global level; however very few, myself being probably the last on that list, know how to approach/ solve this issue.

The question posed is food for thought, would we need organizations like the Arc or social enterprise if the UN was fully funded? I feel the answer to this lies in the heart of the issue, it is a global issue. The scale and magnitude of this issue is so large it appears almost impossible (to me at least) to solve simply by the efforts of one organization. Hence, even if the UN was fully funded, it seems unlikely that they would be able to provide a solution for every problem, there are simply too many problems that require attention.

Plus, let’s not forget that money is a limited resource. Even a fully funded UN will run out of money at some point, their solutions will be money based, and not necessarily sustainable. Hence, initiatives such as the Arc and social enterprise would still be necessary because they they provide more sustainable solutions. They provide the people with the necessary skills so the that they can provide for themselves when they leave, a solution much more tangible than just money. The Arc or social enterprise can reach and tackle more local issues that even a fully funded UN wouldn’t be able to. Thus, I feel it is only fair to say that even a fully funded UN wouldn’t be able to erase the need of initiatives such the Arc or social enterprise.

The toxins in discarded mobile phones polluting waters

As we develop new technology, we discard the old one in a flash. With no thought, we get rid of our old smart phones to buy the new product, without thinking of its implications. The BBC article talks on this fact, how mobile phone waste in particular is becoming a growing problem in the Ivory Coast, mentioning how people simply throw old phones away “in the bin” rather than fixing old phone. Thus accumulating waste that is spreading toxic material into the water (Erbie Lagoon) and affecting health. It also speak on the efforts of Mr.Akim to help run a local recycling centre that helps reduce this waste.

This is an issue not just in Ivory Coast, but here as well. The current mobile phone industry is structured in a way that a launch of a new product makes customers replace their old phone immediately, even if it is in working condition. But is this a good practice? Clearly, as the article showed, it isn’t, especially if the waste of the phones is producing negative side effects. I admire the work Mr.Akim is doing; by recycling the old mobile phones thrown away, not only are they creating a bit of profit for themselves, but the centre is helping create a better environment for the children and residents of the area.

Source: BBC article: Mobile recycling centre and Mr. Akim

This again reinforced the benefit of CSV in my eyes. Mr.Akim said in the article “Somehow they are useful to us and we are also profitable to them,” and this in my eyes is essential in business. Customers and producers share a symbiotic relation, they are incomplete without each other. If both parties can gain something from each other, the relation reaches its peak. I think achieving this concept of shared value in our buying and selling practices will help reduce such issues in the future. Mr.Akim and the recycling centre in my eyes have grasped and implemented this concept perfectly! And as for us mobile phone consumers, it’s time someone reminded us that the
planet is not a dumping ground for our out of demand phone models; it’s time we cleaned up after ourselves!

Works Cited

Ford, Tamasin. “Ivory Coast Tackling Its Toxic Mobile Waste Problem.” BBC News. BBC, 6 Nov. 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2014.

Source: Microsoft Band

“I want a Microsoft band, I need to be healthier” is how my conversation with my parents began yesterday. Being a tech follower myself, the sudden spike in this health-tech category drew my interest, especially since Microsoft was involved. Fact is, many established (Google, Microsoft) and startup (FitBit) companies already have announced or introduced their fitness tracking applications/products. However, the blog post “The tech industry is turning health trackers into commodities before the even go mainstream.” from the PandoDaily blog website caught my eye and got me thinking.

Source: HubPages

The post comments on an issue other than the privacy issues with these health-related products; “the danger of drowning consumers in apathy.” It comments on how companies are turning the health tracking products category into commodities before they actually go mainstream. Fear of this market becoming similar to that of the television industry where there are too many similar choices that make it difficult to make judgment based on the product quality is also mentioned.

I had never considered this aspect, but the concept is interesting to note and I agree with the writer. I’m the type of person who gains interest in a tech product if it has a certain level of exclusivity to it. With every company producing it, what is motivating me to continue to follow this product? We know that most new product categories become commodities eventually; however, by over flooding the category so early in the game, these companies are making health-tech products into commodity even before the market assesses it, which seems utterly pointless. Now, I don’t the pressure tech companies have to keep up with the next technological trend; not selling a popular product can be a detrimental decision. But sometimes, over flooding a new category isn’t always a good idea if that entails loosing customer interest. The blog post brings up some great points, and sums all of it up with a great last line,
“Sometimes a rising tide raises all ships; other times it just drowns everyone aboard them and sends them to Davy Jones’ locker.” This is a possible future for this category. I agree fully with this blogger’s warning, this rising tide may drown the product category entirely. All companies joining the health-tracking product craze, consider yourself warned.

Works Cited

Mott, Nathaniel. “The TechIndustry Is Turning Health Trackers into Commodities before They Even Go Mainstream.” Web log post.PandoDaily. N.p., 30 Oct. 2014. Web. 31 Oct. 2014.

Source: “Burger King tests India waters, starts with 12 outlets”

Burger King (BK), the hamburgerfast food chain, popularly known and famous for its Whopper, is entering foreign Indian water with 12 new stores, first one opening in Delhi today! Tapping into a completely new and large customer market seems like a perfect opportunity, but how good of an idea is this really? What are they giving up for this predominantly vegetarian market?

Source: “Burger King brings a new kind of Whopper to India”

Brand Image: BK is known for their hamburger; customers seek the beef, which will be missing here to accommodate the religious bindings of the population. Cow being a holy animal for both Hindus, and Muslims, BK has had to alter their menu to take this ingredient out. However, beef is what BK serves, many people go to Burger King for the sole purpose of eating their beef. McDonalds, Subway and similar brands have had to make this change too, but their image was never centered on a certain ingredient based product. Burger King’s image is related to its beef products, so this change could negatively influence its image.

MacDonald’s location in Southern India

Competition: there is a lot to consider in the completion region. The fast food market in India is as large as the population. There are numerous, both local and international, companies competing in the market. And BK is entering a bit late. For example, McDonalds has been around for years now, and the place and impression they have created in the minds of consumers is immense. As we discussed in class, McDonalds came way before BK and has established a great image for itself. It is going to be a huge challenge for BK to set themselves apart and shift the consumers’ preferences away from the established competitors to themselves.

And these are only some of the issue that could make it difficult for Burger King to be successful in India. Yes the market is large and untapped by this brand, but there is a lot to tackle and lose for BK in this expansion plan. In my eyes, perhaps this expansion wasn’t the best idea. Burger King is simply a bit too late to tap into this opportunity; companies like MacDonald’s have long beat BK to reach India, and have already succeed. But my eyes will remain glued to BK’s future, let’s hope the Veg Whopper will make a big of a splash as the McAloo Tikki Burger did.

Works Cited

“Burger King Tests India Waters, Starts with 12 Outlets.” The Times of India. Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd., 08 Nov. 2014. Web. 08 Nov. 2014.

“Burger King Brings a New Kind of Whopper to India.” Fox News. FOX News Network, LLC., 31 Oct. 2014. Web. 08 Nov. 2014.

Source: “Disruptive Innovation.”

The preparation for class 14: Innovation and Entrepreneurship lead us to the article “Disruptive Innovation”, which claimed that companies who practice “sustainable innovation” often lose as they make room for disruptive innovators to come in and take over the market. We discussed companies such as Amazon, Apple, Tesla that came in and redefined their respective markets and creating success for their companies. The discussion made me question whether I should even attempt in the future to pursue entrepreneurship. Is it possible for a business to become a success without creating this disruption? At the time class 14 ended, I remained on the fence without a definite answer and a certain uncertainty around the concept of disruptive innovation. However, the Sauder Alumni class helped altered my view of entrepreneurship.

We had the great honor of hearing Sauder graduates and successful entrepreneurs Paul Davidescu, Jenny Duffy, and Tom Dobranski speak about their experiences in the forming of their respective businesses. The fact then dawned on me, after hearing their success stories, that to be a successful entrepreneur, having a “disruptive innovation” isn’t always a set in stone need. Yes, having one would be perhaps ideal and definitely useful, however it isn’t required, as not all of their businesses strived to be disruptive. In my eyes, Jenny Duffy, Paul Davidescu and Tom Dobranski’s businesses were more about delivering a great product to an underserved market (at least for Paul and Tom) and doing something you enjoy (for Jenny, and Tom). There will always be a fear that a service/product won’t succeed as it hasn’t disrupted the market, however I have begun to feel that this fear shouldn’t hold us back from trying- if I love what I do and I am providing a good product, as seen with our alumni, entrepreneurial success can be achieved.

A blog post from The Experts section of the Wall Street Journal about the fallacy of “disruptive innovation” and touched on the same point of how every business seeks this disruption, but fact remains that the occurrence of this disruption is rare. All three alumni have found their own success without necessarily creating a disruption. Does this mean I’ll be able to create a successful business in the future, only time will accurately tell, however I am more willing to step into the ring now. A great thanks to all three of our sections incredible alumni for redefining entrepreneurship for me.

Works Cited

“Disruptive Innovation.” Clayton Christensen. Clayton Christensen, n.d. Web. 31 Oct. 2014.

Ulrich, Karl. “The Fallacy of ‘Disruptive Innovation'” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, Inc., 06 Nov. 2014. Web. 06 Nov. 2014.

In class 15, we discussed the role of CSR play in business and it got me thinking about the importance this role really plays. What motivates businesses be practice CSR? Is it beneficial for all businesses to practice CSR?

Source: “Dying Tongues”

An article I recently read that hits close to home was about Tata Steel’s tribal language preservation project. They built numerous centres in Kolhan, Jharkhand to teach and preserve fast-fading oral languages and traditions. Being from India myself, I understand and see the merit of such an initiative as I myself have seen traditions and languages fade away as the people’s culture changes to mimic a more Western culture. Tata’s Steel initiative for that reason appears great in my eyes, as alongside preserving a rich part of the Indian heritage, they are allowing people in the community to grow through education.

Based on class discussion and the following article (link here), I believe the motivation behind a company’s engagement in CSR goes far beyond simply wanting to do the right thing; there is a lot to gain. In the case of Tata Company, they have developed a strong on brand image as they have gained intensive recognition for their work. They were listed as one of the “World’s most ethical companies” by the Ethisphere Institute in 2013. Such recognition must have had a good effect on the value and image of the company, setting them apart from others in the field. Good company values in my eyes attracts both loyal employees and customers, an ideal combination.

Keeping this in mind, should all businesses invest in engaging in CSR, I believe they should. Yes, there is likely an additional cost to CSR, both financial and labor related, but if making a good social impact can improve the reputation of the company, why not? It seems that more companies now days are embarking the boat of CSR, as CSR and CSV appears to be future of business in our culture. Not everyone will have an identical impact on society, however, as I saw with Tata Company’s initiative, if what they do works, the benefits the company reaps is immense. I am all for boarding on the boat of corporate social responsibility.

Works Cited

“Tata Steel’s Tribal Language Preservation Project Gets Positive Response.” The Economic Times. Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd., 2 Nov. 2014. Web. 06 Nov. 2014.

“Why Do Companies Engage in Corporate Social Responsibility?” The Economic Times. Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd., 21 June 2013. Web. 06 Nov. 2014.

Kamath, Gayatri. “Dying Tongues.” Tata Group. Tata Sons Ltd, June 2012. Web. 06 Nov. 2014.

Fernando, A.C. Business Ethics: An Indian Perspective. N.p.: Pearson Education India, 2009.Print.